[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] on Tuesday rejected [opinion; PDF] a First Amendment challenge to a City of Los Angeles [official website] ban on billboards. Metro Lights, an outdoor advertising company, argued [LA Times report] that the ban on billboard advertising was unconstitutional because the city allowed advertising on bus shelters and other public facilities, a benefit conferred to contractors who installed the structures. The court found such advertising does not undermine the aims of the billboard ban and that the ban is not unconstitutionally underinclusive in the speech it regulates. Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain wrote:

It appears to us, therefore, that the slogan Metro Lights has advanced, that “First Amendment rights are not for sale,” simply misses the point. Certainly the government cannot silence one speaker but not another because the latter has paid a tax, even though it could constitutionally silence both. But that doesn’t mean the City cannot silence speakers in general but permit them to bid for the right to speak on City-owned land, assuming that the speakers on City-owned land do not undermine the goal of the City’s general prohibition.

[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday [official website] granted [opinion; PDF] the government's motion to hold in abeyance the habeas corpus petitions of two Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees, but only if and when the charges against the pair are referred to military commissions. The detainees, Fouad Mahmoud Al Rabiah and Fayiz Mohammed Ahmen Al Kandari, have been charged with providing material support for terrorism and conspiracy, but the Convening Authority has not yet referred the charges to a military commission. Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly [official profile] said a stay of a habeas petition is proper when proceedings would interfere with a military commission, but found:

that [the court] cannot interfere with the findings or rulings of a military commission that does not, and may never, exist. ... Entry of an immediate stay under these circumstances (for reasons that may never materialize) is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s admonition that "[t]he detainees in these cases are entitled to a prompt habeas corpus hearing."

[JURIST] Assistant US Attorney Marc Litt on Tuesday urged that Bernard Madoff [JURIST news archive] be jailed, in a brief [text, PDF] filed with the US District Court for the Southern District of New York [official website]. Litt alleges that Madoff mailed valuable jewelry to family members in violation of a court order prohibiting him from disposing of or concealing any assets. Madoff allegedly sent a package that could be valued at more than $1 million containing approximately 13 watches, a diamond necklace, an emerald ring, and two sets of cufflinks. Litt argued:

The need for detention in this case is clear. The continued release of the defendant presents a danger to the community of additional economic harm and further obstruction of justice. ... Monetary penalties, including restitution and forfeiture, are an important part of justice and will, in the event of a conviction, be part of any sentence in this case. Dissipation of the defendant's assets through transfer to third parties obstruct justice within the meaning of the bail statute because they make it more difficult, if not impossible, to recover all available forfeitable assets to recompense victims.

[JURIST] The Ethiopian Parliament [official website] on Tuesday adopted controversial legislation [draft text, PDF, in Amharic] designed to regulate foreign charities. Under the Proclamation for the Registration and Regulation of Charities and Societies, which passed 327 to 79 [IRIN report], foreign aid organizations and local groups that receive more than 10 percent of their funding from foreign entities will be prohibited from involvement in areas that the government believes are Ethiopian affairs, such as human rights and equality. Proponents of the legislation say that the new law is designed to keep foreign activists from interfering in political matters, but will still allow charities to provide humanitarian aid. Opponents fear that the law will be used to banish groups that the government views as a threat to its power. Human rights organizations such as Amnesty International [advocacy website] have condemned [press release] the law as "an attempt by the Ethiopian government to conceal human rights violations, stifle critics and prevent public protest of its actions ahead of expected elections in 2010." Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] has also criticized [JURIST report] the legislation. The US government has also condemned the law [press release], with State Department spokesperson Robert Wood saying, "we are concerned this law may restrict U.S. government assistance to Ethiopia, particularly on promoting democracy and good governance, civic and human rights, conflict resolution, and advocacy for society’s most vulnerable groups."

Ethiopia's human rights record has recently come under intense international scrutiny. In June, HRW released a report attacking Ethiopian human rights practices in the Ogaden region [JURIST report]. In October 2007, the US House of Representatives passed the Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007 [JURIST commentary], aimed in part at encouraging the improvement of the human rights situation in Ethiopia. The bill is currently before the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. In July 2007, HRW accused Ethiopian troops of violating international humanitarian law [JURIST report] by burning homes and forcibly relocating civilians in Ogaden. In March 2007, HRW also accused Ethiopia of complicity with the US and Kenya in secretly detaining Somalis [JURIST report] accused of being Islamic militants. Ethiopia had admitted in April 2007 that it detained terror suspects but denied that the detentions were secret.

[JURIST] Zimbabwean Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) [official website] on Tuesday announced the release of a revealing and in depth report detailing how lawyers and justice officials within Zimbabwe have allowed the illegal detention and abuse [AllAfrica news] of several political activists. The report points to specific incidents where lawyers for the activists were denied access to their clients and also provides evidence that many of those jailed have been tortured. Although a judge last month ordered the release or transfer of all of the activists based upon these charges of alleged abuse, the state-run law enforcement has yet to act on this judicial mandate. In a related development, seven opposition party members were charged [AP report] Wednesday for allegedly participating in the bombing of a police station Harare, an attack that many believe was perpetrated by the police themselves. The suspects pleaded not guilty.

Among the detainees who have allegedly been abused is Jestina Mukoko, [advocacy website; JURIST news archive] the director of the Zimbabwe Peace Project [advocacy materials]. Mukoko, an outspoken critic of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] was apprehended from her home last month and held in an undisclosed location for several weeks because of her alleged involvement in Mugabe's opposition. While in prison, it was reported that Mukoko was forced to ingest poison [JURIST report], an allegation that has sparked a world wide protest against Zimbabwean police methods. On Monday, a judge ordered that Mukoko's trial be put on hold [JURIST report] until she receives medical care.

[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit [website] on Tuesday ordered [opinion, PDF] that former Enron [JURIST news archive] Chief Executive Officer Jeff Skilling [JURIST news archive] be resentenced for the convictions that stem from his involvement in the collapse of Enron. The three-judge panel upheld all 19 convictions of conspiracy and fraud, but found that the lower court erred in applying the enhancement sentencing provision as outlined in U.S.S.G § 2F1.1b(8)(A), by ambiguously applying the "financial institution" label to Enron. Writing for the court, Judge Edward Prado stated:

Even if the government has presented a reasonable interpretation of the enhancement, the rule of lenity counsels that we must resolve any doubts in the interpretation of a criminal provision in favor of the defendant. Because both sides have made reasonable arguments as to the meaning of "financial institution," this case falls within the rule, and we resolve any doubts in favor of Skilling. The court therefore erred in applying this enhancement. [citations omitted]

[JURIST] Five indicted Blackwater USA [corporate website; JURIST news archive] guards involved in the September 2007 killings of 17 Iraqi civilians [JURIST report] on Tuesday pleaded not guilty to federal manslaughter and weapons charges. The guards appeared in the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] Tuesday after a federal judge in Utah ruled last month [JURIST report] that the proceedings could not be transferred to Utah. The trial is set to begin February 1.

The five guards were indicted [text, PDF; JURIST report] last month on charges of voluntary manslaughter, attempt to commit manslaughter, and using and discharging a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, which carries a 30-year mandatory minimum sentence. The indictments were unsealed [JURIST report] two days later. A sixth guard pleaded guilty [text, PDF] to charges of voluntary manslaughter and attempt to commit manslaughter for his role in the same incident. The Blackwater incident caused domestic outrage in Iraq and has prompted legal controversy in the US. In November, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigation into the incident concluded that the shootings were unjustified [JURIST report]. Last month Bush administration officials announced that Iraq security contractors would be losing immunity from Iraqi law under the recently approved [JURIST reports] US Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with Iraq.