[JURIST] Advisers to US President-elect Barack Obama [transition website] said Monday that he plans to issue an executive order during his first week in office closing the Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] prison camp, according to a report by the Associated Press. The report comes after Obama said Sunday in a television interview [ABC transcript] that he planned to close the base, but that there were still significant obstacles preventing it from being closed immediately. Responding to the interviewer's question of whether or not the base would be closed during his first 100 days in office, Obama said:

It is more difficult than I think a lot of people realize and we are going to get it done but part of the challenge that you have is that you have a bunch of folks that have been detained, many of whom who may be very dangerous who have not been put on trial or have not gone through some adjudication. And some of the evidence against them may be tainted even though it's true. And so how to balance creating a process that adheres to rule of law, habeas corpus, basic principles of [the] Anglo-American legal system, by doing it in a way that doesn't result in releasing people who are intent on blowing us up...

[Closing Guantanamo within the first 100 days is] a challenge. I think it's going to take some time and our legal teams are working in consultation with our national security apparatus as we speak to help design exactly what we need to do. But I don't want to be ambiguous about this. We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our constitution. That is not only the right thing to do but it actually has to be part of our broader national security strategy because we will send a message to the world that we are serious about our values.

[JURIST] The International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website; JURIST news archive] on Monday began a confirmation of charges hearing [summary video, mp4; ICC materials] against former Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) [JURIST news archive] vice-president Jean-Pierre Bemba [ICC profile; JURIST news archive]. Bemba, originally arrested by Belgian authorities [JURIST report] in May, faces war crimes and crimes against humanity charges [arrest warrant, PDF, in French; JURIST report] for violations allegedly committed in the Central African Republic (CAR) [BBC backgrounder] between October 2002 and March 2003. ICC prosecutors said Bemba is responsible for ordering troops to use rape and torture to intimidate CAR civilians against supporting rebel forces in the country, but lawyers for Bemba argued that the forces that allegedly committed the crimes were acting under the authority of the CAR government, and that the charges against Bemba were politically motivated. After being postponed [JURIST report] late last year, the preliminary proceeding against Bemba is scheduled to finish by January 15. It will determine whether he will face trial on the charges against him.

Bemba was elected to office after losing a run-off presidential election [JURIST report] to Joseph Kabila [BBC profile], who in December 2006 became the first freely-elected president of the DRC since 1960. After the election, Bemba's private militia force led a violent campaign against government troops until the DRC Supreme Court rejected his election challenge [JURIST report]. In the process, Bemba's supporters set fire to the Supreme Court building [JURIST report]. Following the clashes, the chief prosecutor of the DRC issued a warrant for Bemba's arrest [JURIST report], and he fled to Europe. A court in CAR referred original war crimes charges [JURIST report] against him to the ICC in April 2006.

[JURIST] The Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland [official website, in German] ruled Monday that more than $8 million deposited by a former associate of late president Ferdinand Marcos [official profile] must be returned to the Philippines government. This is the last of the money deposited in Swiss bank accounts before the overthrow of Marcos in 1986. The Philippine government claimed that the funds were "ill-gotten" [Philippine Star report]. The funds will now be transferred [Manila Times report] to the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) [official website].

In June, the US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] ruled [opinion text; JURIST report] that an interpleader action to determine ownership of assets held by Marcos could not continue because an indispensable party is protected by sovereign immunity. The PCGG claimed ownership of funds improperly moved out of the Philippines by Marcos and invested with US investment bank Merrill Lynch, as did Mariano Pimentel, the representative of a class of 9,539 people holding an unsatisfied human rights judgment [opinion text] against Marcos' estate. Merrill Lynch initiated the interpleader action to settle ownership of the funds, listing the Philippines, PCGG, and Pimentel, among others, as claimants. The Philippines and PCGG asserted their sovereign immunity from the suit and moved to dismiss the entire action, arguing that they were indispensable parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19(b) [text]. The Court ruled that the Philippine government was an indispensable party, overturning a decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and remanding the case to the district court with instructions to dismiss the interpleader action.

[JURIST] The UN Human Rights Council [official website] on Monday adopted a resolution [text, PDF] condemning the Israeli occupation in Gaza [press release] and demanding the immediate withdrawal of military forces. The council also decided to dispatch a fact-finding mission to investigate possible human rights violations. The resolution passed 33-1, with 13 abstentions. Canada was the only dissenting vote. The resolution comes after UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile; JURIST news archive] Friday called for an independent investigation [statement text; JURIST report] of possible war crimes and human rights violations in the ongoing conflict [BBC materials] between Israel and combatants in the Gaza Strip.

Last week, Amnesty International USA [advocacy website] criticized the US insufficiently responding to the Gaza crisis [press release; JURIST report] in a letter [text, PDF] sent to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice [official Profile]. Late last month, militants in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip fired more than 80 rockets and mortars into southern Israel [AFP report], hitting private residences, public buildings, offices, and other populated areas. The Israeli government responded by filing two letters of complaint [text; second letter text] with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and warned militants that they would pay a "heavy price" [AP report] if attacks continued. Both letters of complaint, sent by Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations Gabriel Shalev, cited Article 51 [text] of the United Nations Charter, which provides that a Member-State may act in self-defense in the face of an armed attack until the UN Security Council has taken the steps necessary to maintain international peace and security.

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] heard oral arguments [day call, PDF; briefs] Monday in three cases. In Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council and Alaska v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council [oral arguments transcript, PDF], the Court heard arguments on whether the US Army Corps of Engineers [official website] may issue a permit for discharge of fill material otherwise subject to limitations under Sections 301 or 306 of the Clean Water Act [text, PDF]. Petitioner Coeur sought and received a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers to dam a lake and deposit fill material, increasing the surface area of the lake. Several environmental organizations appealed the decision. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] held [opinion, PDF] in favor of the environmental organizations, finding that petitioner's request should have been governed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website], rather than the Army Corps of Engineers. Counsel for the petitioners argued:

the discharge of fill material, like the mine tailings at issue in this case, should be permitted by the Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Act, and are not ... subject to the effluent guidelines applicable to permits issued by the EPA under section 402 of the Act.

Respondent renounced rights to attach the Cubic judgment because in case B/61 before the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal at the Hague the United States has demanded that any awards Iran receives in its claim against the United States be set off by the amount of the Cubic judgment. This can only occur if the Cubic judgment is released from Respondent's lien and is remitted to Iran's Ministry of Defense.

there is an enormous risk, if this Court decides to interpret the language of this statute broadly, that it will easily sweep beyond any kind of arrangements between Iran and the United States in ways that fundamentally, obviously, disadvantage the very people that Congress clearly intended to benefit by this entire statutory scheme.

not only is the interpretation of this statute controlled by the plain language, but this interpretation makes sense, and it makes sense that Congress would provide for continuous representation for a capital defendant in that it fills a need, a gap in representation, it's efficient, and it also helps to improve the reliability of the death penalty as it's administered in this country.

[JURIST] A Spanish court on Monday dismissed the case against Basque Regional Prime Minister Juan José Ibarretxe [official profile]. He and the two leaders of the Basque socialist party were charged with illegally communicating with the banned Batasuna party, the political wing of the militant ETA [BBC backgrounder, JURIST news archive] in a failed attempt at a ceasefire. The trial, which began [JURIST report] on Thursday, stemmed from charges [JURIST report] brought against the leaders in October for the meetings which took place in October 2007. It was dismissed [BBC report] by the Superior Court of Justice for the Basque Country [official website, in Basque], who declared the case illegitimate because the prosecution admitted that the meetings were not illegal and asked that the case be dismissed.

The Batasuna party is alleged to be a front for ETA, which has been blamed for more than 800 deaths in bombings and attacks since the 1960s. Spain's Supreme Court declared Batasuna illegal [Independent report] in 2003. In September, the court banned [JURIST report] the Basque Nationalist Action Party (ANV) from taking part in political activities because of its alleged ties to Batasuna.

[JURIST] Corruption cases are increasing in Russia and now account for about 1.5 percent of recorded crimes there, First Deputy Prosecutor General Alexander Buksman [official profile] reported in an interview [text, in Russian; Interfax report] printed Monday in the newspaper Gazeta [media website, in Russian]. Buksman said one-seventh of corruption cases take place in law enforcement or judicial settings, citing charges last year against 995 police officers and four judges. Buksman said corruption is a "psychological" problem in Russia, in that its citizens have become accustomed to paying bribes rather than facing the potential consequences of reporting illegal activity.

In December, Russian president Dmitry Medvedev signed anti-corruption legislation [JURIST report] imposing income reporting requirements on public officials and restricting gifts. Medvedev had urged anti-corruption measures since taking office [JURIST reports] in May. Last June, rights group Freedom House [advocacy website] released a report finding that corruption and repression were increasingly threatening legal rights [JURIST report] in former Soviet republics like Russia, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan, with Russia's court system in particular showing significant deterioration of the rule of law.

[JURIST] The Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa [official website] on Monday reinstated [judgment, PDF] charges against political leader Jacob Zuma [BBC backgrounder, JURIST news archive], overruling the decision of the Pietermaritzburg High Court. The court found that the lower court judge had overstepped his authority when he dismissed [JURIST report] the 16 counts of corruption, fraud, money-laundering, and racketeering against Zuma in September 2008. The lower court found the charges to be procedurally invalid because Zuma was not given the chance to respond to the allegations against him. Zuma also argued that the charges against him were brought for political reasons. The court of appeals found that the lower court judge's theories "were not based on any evidence or allegation. They were instead part of the judge's own conspiracy theory and not one advanced by Mr Zuma." It is expected that Zuma will appeal the charges to the Constitutional Court of South Africa [official website]. It is unlikely that additional action will be taken against Zuma until 2010. The African National Congress (ANC) [official website] released a statement [text] following the ruling that the court's decision will not impact whether it chooses to support Zuma as the party's candidate for president in the upcoming election, which is expected to take place later this year.

Zuma has been a controversial political figure in South Africa for several years. He was ousted [JURIST report] as the country’s deputy president in 2005 after an aide was convicted of corruption. He was also charged with rape, but ultimately acquitted and reinstated [JURIST report] as ANC deputy vice president. In July 2008, the South African Constitutional Court rejected a motion [JURIST report] by Zuma to exclude evidence from the corruption trial. Zuma had argued [JURIST report] that evidence seized in 2005 raids by the Directorate of Special Investigations should be thrown out because the raids violated his rights to privacy and a fair trial. The court upheld the validity of the warrants used in the raids, confirming a November 2007 decision [JURIST report] by the South African Supreme Court of Appeal. He was first charged with corruption in 2005, but those charges were later dismissed [JURIST report] because prosecutors failed to follow proper procedures.

[JURIST] Final arguments began Monday in the trial of former Peruvian president Alberto Fujimori [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] for alleged human rights abuses during his 1990-2000 rule. The prosecution contends that between 1991 and 1992, Fujimori was aware of and approved the so-called "Dirty War" carried out against the Shining Path [BBC backgrounder]. The defense maintains [AFP report] that although Fujimori regrets his role in two separate massacres and kidnappings of opposition members, he was involved in neither the planning of the attacks nor did he give approval for them. It is unclear how long the closing arguments will last. If convicted, Fujimori could face up to 30 years in prison.

Fujimori faces several murder and kidnapping charges [JURIST report] stemming from his administration's successful attempt to combat both the Shining Path and the Movimiento Revolucionario Tupac Amaru (MRTA) [advocacy website, in Spanish]. Specifically, he is alleged to have approved the Colina group's November 1991 massacre in Lima's Barrios Altos neighborhood [backgrounder] and July 1992 kidnapping and murder of 10 people from Lima's La Cantuta University [MIT backgrounder]. Neither incident was investigated at the time of its occurrence because Fujimori had suspended the Constitution, purged the judiciary, and dissolved the Congress  [backgrounder]. Investigations begun in 1995 uncovered evidence that the Colina group acted with the full knowledge and approval of the Joint Command of the Armed Forces and the National Intelligence Service. These were quickly terminated by the passage of laws No. 26479 and No. 26492, which granted a general amnesty to anyone accused of human rights violations committed after May 1980. The amnesty laws have since been revoked [judgment, PDF], allowing the present trial to proceed. The government has paid surviving members [judgment text; AP report] of the Barrios Altos massacre for their pain and suffering.