[JURIST] Guantanamo detainee Salim Ahmed Hamdan [DOD materials; JURIST news archive] walked out of the courtroom [Miami Herald report] at his military commission trial on Wednesday, refusing to watch a video depicting one of his interrogation sessions. Hamdan's lawyers had sought to have his interrogations excluded from evidence, arguing that they violated his right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution [text], but presiding judge Navy Capt. Keith Allred ruled [PDF text; JURIST report] that, as a so-called "enemy combatant," Hamdan is not entitled to Fifth Amendment protections. On Tuesday, FBI Special Agent Ali Soufan [New Yorker discussion] had testified that Guantanamo detainees are not advised of their legal rights [AP report] before interrogations. Soufan said that interrogators were told they could forgo reading suspects their rights because Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] activities do not involve law enforcement. He added that he had always informed suspects of their rights before performing interrogations elsewhere in the world.

Hamdan has been in US custody since 2001 when he was captured in Afghanistan and accused of working as Osama Bin Laden's driver. Last week, Allred denied [JURIST report] Hamdan's motion to dismiss the charges against him, holding that the military commission assigned to his trial had jurisdiction to hear the case. Hamdan pleaded not guilty to charges [charge sheet] of conspiracy and providing material support to terrorism at the beginning of the trial Monday. He is the first so-called "enemy combatant" to be tried by a military commission at Guantanamo. In 2006 he successfully challenged US President George W. Bush's military commission system when the Supreme Court ruled [opinion, PDF; JURIST report] that the commission system as initially constituted violated US and international law. Congress subsequently passed the Military Commissions Act of 2006 [DOD materials], which established the current military commissions system. In April, Hamdan announced that he planned to boycott his military commission trial, and in May a military judge delayed the trial [JURIST reports] until this month.

[JURIST] The US House of Representatives on Wednesday passed the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008 [HR 3221 materials; House debate video, flash], a bill designed to address problems from the country's so-called "sub-prime mortgage collapse." The Act provides for government grants allowing municipalities to buy and redevelop foreclosed properties, and would allow the federal government to provide additional financial backing to the publicly supported Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac [corporate websites] mortgage companies. The bill passed by a vote of 272-152, and is also expected to be approved by the Senate later this week. President Bush has said he will sign the bill [NYT report], rescinding an earlier veto threat because of the included grants. Opponents of the bill have said it puts an unfair burden on taxpayers by "socializing costs" but "privatizing profits," of the mortgage industry, and that bill sponsors have tacked on unnecessary and controversial measures to the otherwise bipartisan Act. McClatchy has more.

Earlier this month, the Federal Reserve Board approved new rules for home mortgage loans [draft regulations, PDF; JURIST report] designed to reduce unfair lending practices and increase consumer protection. In June, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) [official website] announced that more than 400 people had been indicted [press release; JURIST report] for fraud involving individual mortgages and the US Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York [official website] announced the indictments [text, PDF; press release] of two senior hedge fund managers at Bear Stearns [corporate website] for allegedly misleading investors even after they knew their mortgage-related funds were at serious risk of collapse.

[JURIST] A Mexican woman pleaded guilty [DOJ press release] Tuesday in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York [official website] to one count of sex trafficking for her role in recruiting Mexican women, sometimes by force, for prostitution in the US. Consuelo Carreto Valencia was extradited to the US in January 2007, and in March 2007 was arraigned [DOJ press releases] in federal court on 27 counts of sex trafficking, conspiracy and smuggling. Her trial on 12 of those counts began Monday but ended Tuesday with her guilty plea. The Department of Justice (DOJ) commented on the charges:

From 1991 through 2004, Carreto Valencia served as a manager in her family’s sex trafficking operation based in San Miguel de Tenancingo, Tlaxcala, Mexico. Carreto Valencia, and her sons Josue Flores Carreto and Gerardo Flores Carreto, and other co-conspirators, recruited young, uneducated women and girls from impoverished areas of Mexico and used or approved of a combination of deception, fraud, rape, forced abortion, threats, and physical violence to compel them to prostitute themselves in brothels throughout the New York City metropolitan area, including Queens and Brooklyn. Carreto Valencia and her family made hundreds of thousands of dollars in prostitution profits, while the women who had been separated from their families in Mexico received next to nothing.

[JURIST] A three-judge panel from the British Court of Appeal [official website] on Wednesday denied the appeals of five men convicted on charges of conspiring to cause death and suffering through a plan to detonate bombs in a crowded area near London. Each of the men was sentenced [JURIST report, AFP report] to at least 35 years in prison after a 14-month terrorism trial [JURIST report]. The trial revealed that some of the convicted men met two of the suicide bombers [MI5 press release] who carried out the attack on the London transit system [JURIST news archive] on July 7, 2005, although that fact was kept from the jury so as not to influence their deliberations. AP has more. BBC News has additional coverage.

Key to the Crown's case against the men was the testimony of Mohammed Babar [BBC profile], an American citizen of Pakistani descent who worked with the defendants and later pleaded guilty to terrorism charges [CNN report] in New York in 2004. Mohammed Momin Khawaja [CBC backgrounder], who was arrested and charged [JURIST report] in connection with the operation in Canada and is currently awaiting trial there, was identified at trial as another co-conspirator.

[JURIST] US Attorney General Michael Mukasey [official website; JURIST news archive] announced [prepared statement, PDF; press release] to the House Judiciary Committee [official website] Wednesday that during his remaining time in office he will focus primarily on addressing the legal rights of US-held enemy combatants and ensuring that voting rights [JURIST news archives] laws are adhered to in upcoming elections. He also told the Committee that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is working to address concerns that its employment decisions have been politically influenced [JURIST news archive] in recent years. Reiterating his belief [statement; JURIST report] that it is inappropriate for the judicial branch to outline the process for trying terrorism suspects, Mukasey said:

Congress and the Executive Branch are in a better position than the courts to create practical procedures and rules to govern the habeas corpus hearings required by the Supreme Court, procedures and rules that would both give the detainees what process they are due and accommodate the grave national security concerns involved. In my speech earlier this week, I outlined six principles that should guide such legislation, and I look forward to working with you and your colleagues on both sides of the aisle and in both houses of Congress to address these important issues promptly.

The Department will maintain a significant presence throughout the election season through both outreach and monitoring. We will work closely with civil rights groups and state and local elections officials to identify and solve problems. We will publicize telephone numbers and websites through which people can bring potential issues to our attention. And, on Election Day, we will deploy hundreds of observers and monitors around the country.

These steps will supplement our ongoing efforts both to enforce laws, including the Voting Rights Act, designed to guarantee access of all Americans to the ballot and to enforce laws, including those prohibiting voter fraud and campaign finance abuse, intended to safeguard the integrity of the voting process. All these efforts are essential in ensuring that elections reflect the will of the people, and in maintaining the confidence of all Americans in our system of government.

[JURIST] Two members of the US House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce [official website] began an investigation [information request, PDF; press release] Tuesday into whether the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) allowed the continued sale of certain drugs that agency officials knew had been manufactured and sold using faulty data. The investigation began after the US Attorney for the District of Maryland filed a motion [text, PDF] with the district court early this month seeking to enforce subpoenas against pharmaceutical company Ranbaxy Laboratories [corporate website], which the government suspected of fraud, mislabeling its products, conspiracy and making false statements in violation of federal law. The motion also alleged that the FDA knew of these possible violations for 18 months but took no action. In the Committee's information request, the Representatives wrote:

Unfortunately, the FDA's alleged lack of action to remove these suspect products from the market requires this Committee to review the pre-market approval inspections of all currently marketed Ranbaxy drugs, as well as any "for cause" inspections, to determine if FDA has expended the resources required to justify leaving these suspect drugs on the market.

[JURIST] Iraqi President Jalal Talabani [official website, in Arabic; BBC profile] and the two other members of the Iraqi Presidency Council refused to sign a provincial election bill on Wednesday, noting that it had been passed by an incomplete parliament. Kurdish legislators boycotted a Tuesday vote on the bill in the Iraqi Parliament [official website, in Arabic], objecting to an attached proposal that would establish a provincial council in Kirkuk [GlobalSecurity backgrounder] to include equal numbers of Kurdish, Arab and Turkmeni representatives. Kurds, who constitute the majority of the area's population, argue that this arrangement does not reflect the region's true population. The bill passed [Council of Representatives press release, in Arabic; AP report] despite the boycott before going to Iraq's Presidency Council for final approval. Talabani said that the council would likely reject the bill [Council of Representatives press release, in Arabic], which would mean delays for scheduled October elections, as it would need to be sent back to parliament for redrafting. AFP has more.

Kurdish parliamentarians staged a walkout [JURIST report] in protest last Tuesday, delaying a vote on the proposed bill. In February, the Presidency Council rejected a draft provincial elections law [JURIST report] that detailed the relationship between Iraq's central and local governments, sending the legislation back to parliament. The draft law was part of a package of legislation approved [JURIST report] by the parliament earlier that month that also included the 2008 budget and an amnesty bill [JURIST report] that will lead to the release of roughly 5,000 prisoners. In March, the Presidency Council withdrew its objections [JURIST report], indicating that the law could take effect without any changes.

[JURIST] Italy will rework plans to fingerprint the country's Roma minority [JURIST news archive], altering requirements to only include those who do not have valid identification cards, the country's Interior Ministry announced Tuesday. The decision is seen as a concession to intense criticism [JURIST report] of the fingerprinting plan by the international human rights community [COE statement] and Roma advocates [ERRC materials]. Earlier this month, the Italian government began carrying out the plan [JURIST report] to record the fingerprints of thousands of Roma, including children, ostensibly to reduce street crime and begging. AP has more.

Last week, a committee of the Italian House of Deputies [official website, in Italian] approved [JURIST report] funding for a universal fingerprinting plan to begin in 2010. Italian leaders have pushed for all Italian citizens and resident foreigners to be fingerprinted for national ID cards, a move seen by some as an attempt to deflect accusations of "ethnic cataloguing" [EUobserver report] of the country's Roma population.

[JURIST] Sudan plans to create its own internationally-monitored courts to try war crimes suspects from the country's Darfur region [JURIST news archive], League of Arab States (LAS) [official website, in Arabic] official Hisham Yussef said on Tuesday. The International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] in the Netherlands currently handles such proceedings, but if Sudanese domestic courts are created with appropriate human rights and accountability safeguards, the ICC is required to hand over jurisdiction under Article 16 of the Rome Statute [PDF text]. The announcement is seen largely as a reaction to the controversial effort [JURIST report] to seek an arrest warrant [application, PDF; ICC press release] for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir [BBC profile, JURIST news archive]. Both the LAS and African Union (AU) [official website] have criticized [JURIST report] the warrant and underlying indictment, saying they threaten peace in the unstable country. Reuters has more. The Sudan Tribune has local coverage.

The LAS released its proposal [press release, in Arabic; JURIST report] for the country to create the courts on Sunday, following an emergency meeting [JURIST report] to mediate the dispute over the ICC's warrant for al-Bashir. The AU also released a resolution [PDF text] Monday calling on the ICC to defer to Sudanese courts once they are legitimized.  The UN Security Council has repeatedly called on Sudan to comply with the investigation of al-Bashir [JURIST report], but Sudan has refused to do so, calling Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo [official profile] a "terrorist" [JURIST report] and suggesting that he should be removed from office. Before al-Bashir's indictment the Sudanese government had already rejected the ICC's jurisdiction and has refused to surrender two previously-named war crimes suspects [JURIST report].

[JURIST] A judge in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York [official website] ruled [petitioner press release] on Tuesday that the government must unseal most of the grand jury testimony from the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg espionage case [trial transcript, PDF; JURIST backgrounder]. In January, George Washington University's National Security Archive petitioned the court [text, PDF; memorandum, PDF] for the release of the transcripts, arguing that "The overwhelming historical interest outweighs any secrecy interests that may have survived." The government responded [brief, PDF] in June:

The Government does not dispute that the Rosenberg atomic spy trial is a case of significant historical importance within the meaning of the "special circumstances" exception, and does not oppose the entry of an Order unsealing the grand jury testimony of those Rosenberg grand jury witnesses who are deceased or who consent to disclosure, i.e. 35 of the 45 witnesses who testified before the grand jury. The Government, however, opposes disclosure of the testimony of the remaining witnesses who either: (1) object to disclosure; or (2) are not deceased and cannot be located to determine their position on disclosure. As to these witnesses, the public's forward looking interest in ensuring that future grand jury witnesses are not dissuaded from coming forward and testifying in high profile cases trumps the need for disclosure at this time.

[JURIST] The Italian Senate [official website, in Italian] on Wednesday announced [press release, in Italian] that it has passed legislation [materials, in Italian; draft bill and backgrounder, PDF, in Italian] granting Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] and other high-ranking officials immunity from prosecution while in office. Berlusconi's government proposed the legislation, which was passed in Italy's lower house [JURIST report] earlier this month, saying that officials need to function without fear of politically-motivated prosecutions. Critics have argued that the law was specifically designed to suspend Berlusconi's own trials on corruption charges [JURIST news archive]. The bill passed by a vote of 171-128, and Italian President Giorgio Napolitano [BBC profile] must sign it before it can take effect. Bloomberg has more.

Italy has recently faced significant criticism by both advocacy groups and members of the country's judiciary [JURIST reports] for relaxing its anti-corruption measures. The majority of the criticism has been targeted at Berlusconi, who has faced trial on at least six occasions involving charges of false accounting, tax fraud, money laundering, embezzlement, and giving false testimony [JURIST reports]. In October 2007, Italy's highest court of appeals upheld Berlusconi's April 2007 acquittal [JURIST reports] on bribery charges. That trial was initially blocked in 2004 by a bill drafted by Berlusconi ally and later defense lawyer Gaetano Pecorella but went ahead after the bill was struck down as unconstitutional. Berlusconi has said he is innocent on all charges and has accused prosecutors of pursuing a political vendetta against him.

[JURIST] A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit [official website] on Tuesday denied an emergency stay [opinion, PDF] for a Mississippi death row inmate challenging the state's lethal injection procedure. The court found that Dale Leo Bishop failed to establish that he would suffer an irreparable injury if the stay of execution was not granted while he appealed a lower court's decision that dismissed his constitutional challenge to Mississippi's lethal injection [JURIST news archive] procedure for failure to comply with the statute of limitations. In a dissent, Judge King argued:

[G]iven the fact that the adequacy of Mississippi’s protocol was effectively never litigated in this case, it seems to me highly inappropriate for the majority to import from Baze language suggesting that a stay may not be granted unless a showing is made of a substantial risk of severe pain, and then go on to decide whether such a showing has been made. Putting aside the fact that Bishop arguably has made such a showing... the effect of this is, again, to require Bishop to show a likelihood of success on the merits of an issue that was not developed below and is not part of this appeal.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit [official website] on Tuesday affirmed [decision, PDF] a lower court's decision [PDF; JURIST report] granting a permanent injunction against enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) [text], a federal law that imposes civil and criminal penalties on website operators for making sexually explicit materials available to minors over the Internet. The Act also requires adult websites to verify viewer age with a credit card number or any other reasonable method of age verification. The court stated that "because COPA is a content-based restriction on protected speech, it is presumptively invalid and the Government bears the burden of showing its constitutionality." Finding that the requirements of strict scrutiny were not fulfilled, the court relied heavily on the findings of fact from the lower court, and reasoned:

During oral argument, the Government contended that the First Amendment does not prohibit Congress from adopting a “belt-and-suspenders” approach to addressing the compelling
government interest of protecting minors from accessing harmful material on the Web, with filters acting as the “belt” and COPA as the “suspenders.” But as counsel for plaintiffs correctly pointed out, under the First Amendment, if the belt works at least as effectively as the suspenders, then the Government cannot prosecute people for not wearing suspenders.