[JURIST] Convicted murderer Heliberto Chi [Texas materials; docket information] on Thursday became the second foreign national to be put to death [Proceso Digital report, in Spanish] in Texas since the International Court of Justice (ICJ) [official website] ordered [press release and text] the US to stay such executions. The US Supreme Court refused to grant [AP report; PDF order] either a stay or certiorari just hours before the Honduran man was executed at 6 pm local time. Lawyers for the Honduran government have argued that Chi was improperly prevented from contacting his government in violation of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations [PDF text]. Last month, lawyers for Mexico made a similar argument [JURIST report] before the ICJ to block the execution [JURIST report] of Mexican citizen Jose Ernesto Medellin [ASIL backgrounder; JURIST news archive], which took place on Tuesday. The Houston Chronicle has local coverage.

The governor of Texas announced his refusal to comply [JURIST report] with the ICJ order last month. In March, the US Supreme Court ruled [decision; JURIST report] in Medellin v. Texas [Duke Law case backgrounder; JURIST report] that neither a 2005 memorandum [text; JURIST report] from President Bush ordering Texas to rehear several cases against Mexican nationals nor the March 2004 ICJ decision [materials] were binding on Texas officials who had refused to rehear Medellin's case. Last year, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed Chi's lethal injection execution [JURIST report] while the US Supreme Court considered Baze v. Rees (07-5439) [docket; JURIST report], a case reviewing whether lethal injection is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment.

[JURIST] War crimes suspect and former fugitive Radovan Karadzic [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] has submitted a document [text, PDF] to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official site] asserting that he was granted an immunity deal by former US Ambassador to the UN Richard Holbrooke [PBS biography], conditioned on his removing himself from public life. The ICTY made the document available Thursday, and in it Karadzic wrote that he had not been allowed to fully explain himself in court Wednesday. He claimed that:

Mr Holbrooke undertook on behalf of the USA that I would not be tried before this Tribunal and that I should understand that for a while there would be very sharp rhetoric against me so that my followers would not hamper the implementation of the Dayton agreement. The USA kept its promise to ease the pressure on the SDS and Mr Holbrooke himself boasted in the press that he had persuaded me to withdraw not only from public but also from party offices. There is evidence of this in the media, which contain proof that there was an agreement. [sic]

[JURIST] Salim Ahmed Hamdan [DOD materials; JURIST news archive] was sentenced Thursday to five and a half years in prison [AP report] following his conviction [JURIST report] Wednesday of providing material support for terrorism [charge sheet, PDF] through his association with Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders. Hamdan had pleaded for leniency after apologizing for the deaths caused by his counterparts, and was given credit for the five years he has been detained since charges were first brought against him, meaning he could be released in as few as six months. The verdict was the first rendered by a military commission trial at Guantanamo Bay. On Wednesday, the American Civil Liberties Union criticized the conviction [press release], saying it "represent[ed] nothing more than an illusion of justice" and called for an end to the commission system. Prosecutors in the case had sought a sentence of at least 30 years. AP has more.

Hamdan has been in US custody since 2001, when he was captured in Afghanistan and accused of working as Osama Bin Laden's driver. 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 July. A judge in the US District Court for the District of Columbia subsequently rejected [JURIST report] a bid by Hamdan's lawyers to stay his trial, ruling that a civilian court should refrain from reviewing the case until the military commission issues a final judgment. In July, the military court 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.

[JURIST] Former Enron [corporate website; JURIST news archive] executives convicted on charges related to the 2001 accounting scandal may be eligible for new trials, depending on the outcome of an appeal [JURIST report] by former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling [Houston Chronicle profile]. Skilling was convicted under a theory of "deprivation of honest services," which allows for the prosecution of people who enabled fraud but did not personally benefit from it. Experts say his appeal has a good chance of success after the Fifth Circuit rejected [JURIST report] that theory in a 2006 case involving four former Merrill Lynch executives. If successful, other Enron executives may also challenge their convictions under the theory. McClatchy has more.

In September 2007, Skilling appealed his conviction [JURIST report; verdict backgrounder] on 19 counts of conspiracy, insider trading, and securities fraud, claiming errors by prosecutors and the trial judge. In April 2007, former Enron Vice President Christopher Calger [Houston Chronicle profile], who was also charged under the "honest services" theory, withdrew a guilty plea to a charge of conspiracy to commit wire fraud after the 2006 Merrill Lynch verdict was overturned. In the Merrill Lynch case, the convictions of the executives were overturned when the court found that they had acted for the benefit of Enron and not to benefit themselves personally.

[JURIST] Maldives President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom [official websites] on Thursday signed into law [press release] a new constitution [PDF text] for the country, providing for multi-party elections, an independent judiciary, and a more powerful legislature. The constitution also provides a number of enumerated rights for citizens and establishes several special commissions on issues including human rights and corruption. The document was drafted by the People’s Special Majlis [official website], which was convened for the purpose in 2004 and was dissolved by the President [press release] after Thursday's signing ceremony. The country's first competitive presidential elections since 1978 will be held in October and Gayoom has announced he will run for a seventh term. Reuters has more. Miadhu News has local coverage.

The Maldives constitution was last modified [PDF text] in 1998, and Thursday's changes came in response to international criticism [AI report, PDF] of 2003 government actions against protesters of prison conditions [AI reports] in the country. The government asserts that it has already instituted a number of other reforms [government report, PDF] in recent years.

[JURIST] Pakistan's coalition government said Thursday that it would push to impeach current President Pervez Musharraf [official website; JURIST news archive], a move that would require the endorsement of two-thirds of legislators in a joint session of parliament. Pakistan People's Party (PPP) head Asif Ali Zardari [BBC profile] said Thursday that Musharraf had given a "clear commitment" to step down from office after his party was defeated in parliamentary elections [JURIST report], but subsequently refused to resign or go into exile. He also accused Musharraf of not following through on a promise to ask parliament for a confidence vote. PPP and coalition partner Pakistan Muslim League - Nawaz (PML-N) officials have disagreed [JURIST report] on how to limit or amend Musharraf's powers, with the PML-N generally favoring resignation or impeachment and the PPP favoring working with Musharraf to improve the country's political system. However, after Musharraf declared [Dawn report] in June that he would neither step down nor go into exile, PPP leaders took a tougher stance, stating that Musharraf was only president by default and warning that if he did not step down, the parliament would impeach him [The News report]. AP has more. BBC News has additional coverage.

In June, the PML-N called for Musharraf's impeachment [JURIST report] and released a "charge sheet" outlining misuse of presidential authority, including the dismissal of the country's superior court judges. Also in June, PML-N leader and former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif [JURIST news archive] called for Musharraf to be tried for treason [JURIST report], labeling him a traitor disloyal to Pakistan and saying he should be punished for the "damage" that he has done to the country in the years since he led a military coup [BBC backgrounder] and unseated Sharif in 1999.

[JURIST] A Pennsylvania judge has ruled [order, PDF] to allow Christian foster parent organization Bair Foundation [advocacy website] to proceed with its lawsuit [complaint, PDF] against the well-known law firm Reed Smith [firm website], rejecting four preliminary challenges by Reed Smith. The lawsuit alleges that Reed Smith overcharged Bair for representation in an employment discrimination lawsuit, billing Bair almost one million dollars despite originally telling the group that legal fees would only run $50,000. Bair asserted that the large firm model, which focuses on billable hours and pulling in large profits, is inappropriate for dealing with smaller nonprofit clients:

In implementing its ambitious strategy of capturing global clients, which Reed Smith boasts results in "a constant increase in revenue per partner," it has acknowledged that comparatively small regional or local law firms can or perhaps should service smaller clients. This is so because such firms typically charge much lower fees than "white shoe" international law firms like Reed Smith and are therefore more affordable to these smaller clients.

However, Reed Smith has inexplicably continued to represent certain much smaller clients which lack substantial financial resources, such as Bair, a not-for-profit charitable foundation.

[JURIST] Howard Berman (D-CA), Chairman of the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee [official websites], released a letter obtained by JURIST on Thursday in which he urged the Bush administration to postpone an international nuclear trade deal with India until the country is required to provide permanent security to nuclear facilities and stop nuclear weapons testing. Berman said that without the requirements, the agreement would violate a 2006 US law [HR 5862 materials] and give other NSG countries an advantage in trade with India, and urged the administration to push for a deal consistent with a resolution [HR 711] he introduced in 2007. The deal under consideration by the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) [official website] would provide an exception to International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) rules [PDF, text] to allow NSG member states to trade nuclear materials with India, despite the fact that it is not a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) [PDF, text]. In the letter, addressed to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Berman wrote:

I am a friend of India and a supporter of U.S.-India nuclear cooperation. Yet I find it incomprehensible that the Administration apparently intends to seek or accept an exemption from the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) guidelines for India with few or none of the conditions contained in the Henry J. Hyde United States-India Peaceful Atomic Energy Cooperation Act of 2006. Such an exemption would be inconsistent with U.S. law, place American firms at a severe competitive disadvantage, and undermine critical U.S. nonproliferation objectives. It would also jeopardize congressional support for nuclear cooperation with India, this year and in the future.

Last year I introduced H. Res 711, a resolution that expresses the sense of the House that the President should withhold support from any proposed exemption for India in the NSG guidelines that is not fully consistent with the Hyde Act and that does not incorporate a number of key provisions, including: the immediate termination of all nuclear commerce by NSG member states if India detonates a nuclear explosive device or if the IAEA determines that India has violated its safeguards commitments; a requirement that the safeguards agreement concluded between India and the IAEA provides for safeguards in perpetuity for all nuclear facilities, materials, equipment and technology designated as “civil”, in accordance with IAEA standards, principles and practices; a prohibition on the transfer of enrichment, reprocessing and heavy water production technology by any NSG member state to India; and a stipulation that NSG supplier states may not grant India consent to reprocess nuclear fuel except in a facility that is under permanent and unconditional safeguards.

[JURIST] Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] on Thursday pleaded not guilty to sodomy charges [JURIST report] based on allegations by a former aide. The presiding judge ordered Anwar released on bail, ruling that he was not a flight risk. Anwar has denied the accusations, saying that they are part of a government campaign to to upset his plans to run in an August 26 by-election, and filed a lawsuit against his accuser [JURIST report] in late June. Under Malaysian law, sodomy is punishable by 20 years in prison regardless of consent. Human rights groups have also questioned the timing of the charges. Human Rights Watch Asia [advocacy website] Thursday called for the government to drop the charges [press release], while Amnesty International [advocacy website] described the allegations as "politically motivated" [press release]. AFP has more. The Financial Times has additional coverage.

Malaysian authorities briefly arrested Anwar last month, less than a day after a warrant was issued for his arrest [JURIST reports]. Last week, Anwar released a medical report [PDF text and explanation; JURIST report] that he said refuted the sodomy allegations. Anwar was Malaysia's Deputy Prime Minister under former Prime Minister Mahathir bin Mohamad [BBC profile] until he was fired in 1998 following earlier sodomy charges of which he was initially convicted but later acquitted. He only recently reentered Malaysian politics following the expiration of a ten-year ban [JURIST report] against him for unrelated corruption charges. Last month the Federal Court of Malaysia ruled he could challenge the constitutionality [JURIST report] of his original dismissal from office.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] on Wednesday ordered [decision, PDF] a district court to accept guilty pleas entered by three illegal aliens facing immigration charges. The defendants had entered unconditional guilty pleas to charges that they re-entered the country after having been removed previously, a violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) [statute provision]. The lower court had refused to accept the guilty pleas because it found they were not entered in accordance with  procedural rules [FRCrP Rule 11(b) text] governing pleas, and a US Attorney charged the men with more serious violations of the INA punishable by longer prison terms. Holding that the pleas were not in violation of the rule and ordering their acceptance, the Ninth Circuit stated:

The government lost its power to file additional charges the moment defendants pled guilty knowingly, voluntarily, and unconditionally before the magistrate judges. Defendants' pleas may not have taken final legal effect at that moment, as defendants remained free to withdraw their pleas...But whatever legal significance may attach to a guilty plea taken by a magistrate judge, the plea also carries significant real-world consequences. A defendant's guilty plea is a confession, freely and publicly made, that he is a criminal. This has immediate and enduring effects on the defendant's standing in the community, and for that reason and many others is often an excruciating experience. If the confession meets the requirements of Rule 11(b) - requirements that exist for the defendant's own protection - then the government has no power to force the defendant to go through the ordeal again to serve its own purposes.

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of India [official website] temporarily reinstated a government ban on the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) [Jamestown Foundation profile] on Wednesday, reversing the holding of the Delhi High Court [official website], which had just lifted the ban on Tuesday. The lower court had reasoned that because the government had failed to supply any new evidence of SIMI's involvement in illegal activity, the seven-year ban on the group should be lifted. The Indian government quickly appealed the ruling, claiming that lifting the ban would considerably harm the country's anti-terrorism efforts. The Supreme Court's ruling gives the government three weeks to present new evidence of SIMI's unlawfulness in order to make the ban permanent. Reuters has more.

The Indian government outlawed SIMI in 2001 pursuant to India's Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act of 1967 [PDF text], alleging the group is tied to several recent bombings [SATP materials] in the country, but advocates [Milli Gazette op-ed] say charges against the group were brought for political reasons alone. Several countries including Egypt, Spain [JURIST news archives], and Canada [JURIST report] have banned Islamic groups or political parties for alleged ties to terrorist activities in recent years, while the UK has lifted some bans [JURIST news archive] on groups no longer considered threats.