[JURIST] The Iraqi cabinet voted Sunday in an emergency session to approve a final draft of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) [CFR materials] between the US and Iraq. The SOFA, which determines the relationship between Iraqi, American and Multi-National Force Iraq (MNF-I) [official website] forces in the country, requires US and MNF-I forces to exit Iraqi cities by June 30 [UPI report], and calls for the removal of all combat troops by 2011 unless the Iraqi government requests otherwise. This extends the deadline for US troops to remain in Iraq for three years, as the UN mandate expires in December [UN press release]. The SOFA will also define the ongoing relationship between US and MNF-I forces and Iraqi civilian institutions, including the national police service and the Iraqi justice system. In particular, it gives Iraqi courts limited jurisdiction over American military personnel [JURIST report] for crimes committed off base when the troops are not on an authorized mission. The SOFA must now go before the Iraq parliament for a final vote. AP has more. BBC News has additional coverage.

Last week, Iraqi Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi [personal website, in Arabic], one of two Iraqi vice presidents, called for a national referendum [JURIST report] on any proposed SOFA. The agreement has been delayed [JURIST report] by months of negotiation, and must still be approved by lawmakers in both countries.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] on Friday ruled [opinion, PDF] that tribal sovereign immunity [NCAI backgrounder] applies to lawsuits brought in federal court dealing with the profit-making businesses of Indian tribes. In Cook v. Avi Casino Enterprises, Christopher Cook filed suit against Avi Casino Enterprises (ACE), a tribal corporation, and its employees after he was hit by a drunk driver. The driver was an employee of the casino who had been served drinks at a function at the Avi Casino, located on the Fort Mojave reservation in Nevada. Cook argued that public policy demands that tribal corporations operating in the economic mainstream should not receive the same immunity granted to Indian tribes themselves. The court rejected that argument, and concluded that immunity applied to the corporation and its employees:

Tribal sovereign immunity protects Indian tribes from suit absent express authorization by Congress or clear waiver by the tribe. This immunity applies to the tribe’s commercial as well as governmental activities.

The Supreme Court has somewhat grudgingly accepted tribal immunity in the commercial context...[T]he settled law of our circuit is that tribal corporations acting as an arm of the tribe enjoy the same sovereign immunity granted to a tribe itself.

The final question is whether ACE’s tribal immunity extends to two of its employees...We conclude that it does...[W]e hold that tribal immunity protects tribal employees acting in their official capacity and within the scope of their authority. Cook has sued Dodd and Purbaugh in their official capacity only, and thus the district court correctly dismissed them from this suit.

[JURIST] The Israeli Supreme Court [official website] ruled Sunday that settlers in a disputed house in the West Bank [CIA backgrounder] city of Hebron have three days to evacuate or else face eviction. The four-story home, called the House of Peace (Beit HaShalom) [Hebron Jewish Community backgrounder; advocacy materials] by Jewish settlers, was originally occupied by a group of 150 in March 2007. The settlers had presented evidence [Haaretz report] to the Court which allegedly showed they had purchased the house from a Palestinian, Faez Rajabi, but Rajabi denied selling the building. The Court did not rule on who has legal ownership of the building, stressing that the issue will be decided in a district court. The decision gives the Israeli government control over the building until the ownership issue is resolved. Many settlers groups, including the Yesha Council [Ynet backgrounder] condemned the ruling, which many believe will lead to violence if enforced. Morris Abraham, the New York-based businessman who initially bought the property, has said he will sue the State of Israel [YNet report] if the settlers are evicted. AFP has more. Haaretz has local coverage.

Ownership and occupation of land in the West Bank have been ongoing points of contention between Israelis and Palestinians, and Israeli government policy on the area has drawn international criticism. Just last week, Switzerland's Federal Department for Foreign Affairs (FDFA) condemned Israeli destruction of Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem as a violation of international humanitarian law [JURIST report] and called on Israel to stop the demolitions. In October, five Palestinians represented by Israeli rights group Yesh Din [advocacy website] filed suit [complaint, PDF, in Hebrew] against the State of Israel seeking $427,000 in damages for failing to protect Palestinian-owned land in the West Bank from trespassers and an illegal outpost. The suit, brought in the Magistrate Court in Jerusalem, alleged that the Migron [Binyamin backgrounder] community was illegally settled on the plaintiffs' land with the assistance of Israeli authorities, altering its topography and blocking the owners' access to the area. The Palestinian owners were the first to seek monetary damages from Israel in a land dispute.