[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF] Monday in three cases. In Chambers v. United States [oral arguments transcript, PDF; merit briefs], the Court will consider whether failure to report to prison constitutes a "violent felony" for purposes of sentence enhancement under the Armed Career Criminals Act (ACCA) [18 USC § 924(e), text]. Petitioner Deondery Chambers pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. At sentencing the state of Illinois argued that he was subject to a 15-year mandatory minimum sentence under the ACCA, based in part on a prior conviction for escape when he failed to report to prison. Relying on Seventh Circuit precedent, the District Court held that this type of escape constituted a "violent felony" under the ACCA. The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit court affirmed [opinion, PDF]. There is a circuit split on this issue with the Ninth and DC Circuits holding that failure to report is not a violent felony and the other 10 circuits holding that it is. At oral argument, counsel for petitioner argued that "[f]ailure to report is not a violent felony...because it presents neither a serious potential risk of injury to others nor involves violent and aggressive conduct," while counsel for the state argued that "[f]ailure to report...is similar in kind to burglary because it's purposeful, violent, and aggressive in the same way as burglary."

The Supreme Court also heard arguments in the case of United States v. Hayes [oral arguments transcript, PDF; merit briefs], in which the Court will consider whether a federal gun law [18 USC § 922(g)(9), text], which prohibits anyone convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence from possessing a firearm, requires that a domestic relationship between an attacker and victim be a specific element of the crime. Respondent Randy Edward Hayes was convicted in 1994 under a West Virginia battery statute for battering his wife, but a domestic relationship between the victim and the attacker was not a specific element of that statute. Hayes was indicted by a federal district court for possessing a firearm in violation of § 922(g)(9). On appeal the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reversed [opinion, PDF], holding that § 922(g)(9) requires a domestic relationship element, even though nine other circuits have held that no such element is required. At oral arguments, counsel for the US argued that Hayes's conviction for battery is a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence because "the statutory text is most naturally read that way...[and] a contrary reading would defeat Congress's purposes. Counsel for respondent argued that the government's argument "describes a statute that Congress considered but did not pass."

Finally, the Court heard arguments Monday in the case of Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts [oral arguments transcript, PDF; merit briefs], in which the Court will consider whether a forensic analyst's laboratory report is testimonial evidence under the Confrontation Clause, giving criminal defendants a right to cross-examine the analysts. In the 2004 case of Crawford v. Washington [opinion, PDF] the Court held that testimonial evidence could not be admitted unless the defendant had an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. Since then, courts have struggled to determine what constitutes "testimonial evidence." Counsel for the petitioner argued that forensic laboratory reports "are crafted purposefully for the express purpose of proving a fact that is an element of a criminal offense" and are "quintessentially testimonial evidence." Counsel for the state of Massachusetts argued that such reports are not testimonial evidence, but rather are a "report of a scientist test."

[JURIST] The Muslim Defender Team (TPM), the group of lawyers representing the three men executed Saturday [JURIST report] for the 2002 Bali bombings [BBC backgrounder], said Monday that it will file charges against Indonesia's attorney general, alleging that the execution process violated the bombers' human rights. TPM argues [Jakarta Post report] that Indonesia violated human rights standards when authorities denied the families final visits with the convicts [BBC report] and refused access to the bodies after the execution. In a related development, critics of the Indonesia government insisted [Jakarta Post report] Monday that the government's indecisiveness about how to handle the execution caused undue public sympathy for the convicts. The Indonesia Attorney General initially postponed the execution in August [JURIST report], and critics contend that delay allowed the media to profit from the public's increased interest. AFP has more.

The three men executed, Mukhlas, Imam Smudra, and Amrozi Nurhasyim [BBC profiles], were members of the Southeast Asian terror group Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) [CFR backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. They had called on Islamic militant groups to carry out retribution attacks, which resulted in stepped-up security in Jakarta and a warning [text] issued by the US embassy in Indonesia. Thousands of supports turned out late Sunday at the funerals of the bombers [AP report] in their home villages. Last Monday, the Indonesian Supreme Court rejected last-minute appeals [JURIST report] filed by relatives of the men because they had exhausted their rights of appeal.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] denied certiorari [order list, PDF] Monday in the capital cases of Kelly v. California (07-11073) [docket; cert. petition, PDF] and Zamudio v. California (07-11425) [docket; cert. petition, PDF]. Petitioners in the cases were seeking new guidelines for "victim impact" evidence presented to juries during sentencing. Petitioners Douglas Kelly and Samuel Zamudio sought to remand the sentencing phases of their murder convictions on the grounds that emotional videos created by their victims’ families and shown to jurors were overly prejudicial. Justices Stephen Breyer, David Souter, and John Paul Stevens [official profiles, PDF] favored review, but four votes are required to grant certiorari. In a separate dissent [dissent, PDF], Stevens criticized impact evidence for its failure to speak to the defendant’s character, writing:

Although the video shown to each jury was emotionally evocative, it was not probative of the culpability or character of the offender or the circumstances of the offense. Nor was the evidence particularly probative of the impact of the crimes on the victims’ family members: The pictures and video footage shown to the juries portrayed events that occurred long before the respective crimes were committed and that bore no direct relation to the effect of the crimes on the victims’ family members.

[JURIST] A Bangladeshi court on Monday ordered three members of the cabinet of former Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia [profile] to jail on corruption charges. Matiur Rahman Nizami, Ali Ahsan Mohammad, and Saifur Rahman, who served as industry, social welfare and finance ministers respectively, allegedly ignored lower bidders when they awarded a Chinese company a contract to operate a coal mine in northern Bangladesh. Nizami, leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, and Rahman, leader of the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) are important allies of Zia who have threatened to boycott parliamentary elections [BBC report] scheduled for next month. Hearings in the case against the three detained men will be held later this week. The International Herald Tribune has more. BDNews24 has local coverage.

In May, Bangladesh's Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) [governing statute] filed formal corruption and abuse of power charges [JURIST report] against Zia for an alleged kickback scheme that awarded lucrative gas contracts to Canadian oil company Niko Resources Ltd.. Bangladesh's current anti-corruption crackdown began in February 2007 as eight former Bangladeshi ministers were accused of corruption and 13 other former ministers and senior politicians were arrested in raids on their homes after Bangladeshi President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency in the country and canceled a scheduled national election [JURIST reports]. Zia and her son were arrested on suspicion of corruption [JURIST report] in September.

[JURIST] German officials on Sunday arrested an aide to [KBC report] Rwandan President Paul Kagame [official website] in connection with the 1994 assassination of then-president Juvenal Habyarima [NYT report] that touched off the infamous Rwanda genocide [HRW backgrounder]. Rose Kabuye [advocacy profile], an official in the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) [HRW profile], was arrested under a European warrant issued by French Judge Jean-Louis Bruguiere [BBC profile] in 2006. German officials said that because Kabuye entered the country on personal business, she was not protected by her diplomatic status that had previously prevented her arrest. Rwandan officials have condemned [AP report] Kabuye's arrest, accusing France of issuing the warrant for political reasons. BBC News has more. AFP has additional coverage.

In October, German authorities transferred [JURIST report] Augustin Ngirabatware, a former Rwandan minister suspected of involvement in the 1994 Rwanda genocide [BBC backgrounder], from a facility in Frankfurt to a UN detention facility in Arusha, Tanzania where he faces trial by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) [official website]. In July, German border police arrested [press release; JURIST report] Rwandan war crimes suspect Callixte Mbarushiman as he was preparing to travel to Russia. In recent months, Rwanda has unsuccessfully sought [JURIST report] to have some of those indicted by the ICTR transferred to Rwanda to face trial by domestic courts.

[JURIST] Advisers to US President-elect Barack Obama [official website] have begun working on a plan to hold criminal trials in US courts for a large number of Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees, according to a Monday report [text] by the Associated Press. Under the plan, which would also entail the end of Guantanamo-based military commissions [JURIST news archive], the majority of detainees would either be released or brought to the US to face criminal charges. Cases that involve the use of particularly sensitive evidence would be tried in special courts designed to protect the information. The plan has already faced criticism from those who either argue that the detainees should not be brought into the country at all, or that they should all be tried in traditional criminal courts. Meanwhile Monday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy site] began an ad campaign [PDF image] and started a petition [advocacy website] calling on Obama to close the prison [press release] and end the use of military tribunals on his very first day in office. In the wake of Sunday comments by Obama transition chief John Podesta on using executive authority [JURIST report] to ensure early reversal of various contentious Bush administration policies, the ACLU also called on him to issue an executive order banning the use of torture during interrogations.

If carried out, it is not clear what effect the plan will have on previous convictions of detainees by the military commissions or the habeas corpus petitions others now have before federal district courts [JURIST reports]. Last week, a judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] began [JURIST report] habeas hearings for six Algerians challenging their detention at Guantanamo Bay. The US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit [official website] recently suspended its review of a detainee's case because it held it may lack jurisdiction [JURIST report] over the case.

[JURIST] The Judges Association of Serbia (JAS) [official website, in Serbian] has criticized [statement] a set of proposed judicial reforms slated for debate in the country's parliament beginning Tuesday. The Serbian Ministry of Justice and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) mission to Serbia [OSCE report, PDF] have been working with the judges on the Draft Law on Judges of Serbia [text] since the drafting of the Constitution of Serbia [text, PDF; JURIST report] in 2006. JAS maintains that the version of the draft law being sent to parliament was never shared with it and did not receive the necessary public discussion. JAS also objects to several specific provisions, including those related to judicial appointments. The association asserts that the proposed appointment of lower judges by a parliament appointed High Judicial Council is violative of judicial independence. B92 has local coverage.

In order for Serbia to remain a candidate [JURIST report] for induction into the EU in 2009, EU authorities have said it must continue to make progress in forming an independent judiciary, along with fighting corruption, and complying fully with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) [official website]. Serbia has received praise [JURIST report] from the Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly for reforms already made.

[JURIST] John Podesta [CAP profile], former White House Chief of Staff under President Bill Clinton and now co-chair of the transition team for US president-elect Barack Obama [transition website] said in an interview [transcript] on Fox News Sunday over the weekend that Obama is making plans to issue executive orders to reverse some of the more contentious policies implemented during the Bush administration. At the top of the list for review are the limitations on stem cell research and expansion of domestic drilling for oil and gas. Podesta said:

There's a lot that the president can do using his executive authority without waiting for congressional action, and I think we'll see the president do that to try to restore...a sense that the country is working on behalf of the common good, that we're going to try to restore wages, give people the right kind of ways that they can build on their own lives, and when they work hard that they'll be rewarded for it.