[JURIST] The Central Criminal Court of Iraq (CCCI) [establishment order, PDF] on Sunday set a Feb. 19 trial date for the Iraqi journalist accused of throwing his shoes at former US President George W. Bush. The court allowed the charge of assaulting a foreign leader, punishable by up to 15 years in prison, to stand, despite defendant Muntader al-Zaidi's [BBC profile] attempt to have it reduced to attempted aggression. Defense lawyer Dhiya al-Saadi said he will try to have the charges dismissed [AFP report] and emphasized that his client was trying to insult, not injure, the US president. The announcement of a trial date comes after an official investigation, which initially led to a trial postponement [JURIST reports].

Those opposed to al-Zaidi's trial have criticized the CCCI for failing to meet international standards of fairness and due process [HRW report], and have alleged that al-Zaidi was beaten while in custody. There have also been allegations that a purported apology letter from al-Zaidi had been forged [CBS report]. The shoe-throwing incident occurred at a Dec. 14 joint news conference [transcript] at which Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister al-Maliki [BBC profile] signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) [text, PDF; CFR backgrounder] governing the future US military presence in the country.

[JURIST] Bolivia's new constitution [PDF text, in Spanish], which gives more power to the country's indigenous majority, went into effect on Saturday. Announcing the event, President Evo Morales [official website, BBC profile] said it represented a new beginning [press release, in Spanish] for the country, and an earlier release [text, in Spanish] by his office compared it to the Magna Carta [backgrounder]. The new charter provides for redistribution of land and natural resource revenues [JURIST report], the creation of congressional seats reserved for indigenous representatives, and the institution of special courts for some indigenous communities. It also prohibits the posting of foreign military bases within the country and eliminates an existing one-term limit on Bolivian presidents.

The new constitution had been strongly opposed in regions where more voters own land or are of European descent, but was nevertheless approved in a national referendum [JURIST reports] in January. In October 2008, the Bolivian National Congress ratified [JURIST report] the proposed reforms [JURIST news archive] after Morales agreed not to run for re-election in 2014. In August 2008, Morales won a confidence referendum, which he personally proposed [JURIST reports] in a bid to legitimize his campaign for the constitutional changes.

[JURIST] Thousands of Venezuelans gathered Saturday in Caracas and other cities to protest a proposed constitutional amendment [text, in Spanish] that would eliminate presidential term limits in the country. The amendment, which would allow President Hugo Chavez [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] to seek re-election in 2012, was passed [JURIST report] by the Venezuelan National Assembly [official website, in Spanish] last month, but must be approved in a national referendum on February 15 before taking effect. Both the protesters and opposition politicians have accused Chavez [JURIST report] of using the constitutional reforms to consolidate his power. There have also been reports that Chavez's government has been using increasingly harsh tactics [IHT report] to quiet student and other groups opposing the amendment. A similar amendment was among constitutional reforms rejected by voters [JURIST report] in a 2007 referendum, but a January poll by Datanalisis [corporate website] showed that a small majority of likely voters now favor the amendment.

Venezuelans who favor eliminating term limits have been equally vocal, and in December a petition signed by almost five million people [JURIST report] endorsing the amendment was given to the National Assembly. Trying to distinguish the current amendment from his failed 2007 effort, Chavez has acknowledged that the earlier reforms, which would have allowed him to stand indefinitely for re-election, handpick local leaders under a new political map, create new types of communal property, and to suspend civil liberties during states of emergency, were "quite profound and intense," and may have been too ambitious.

[JURIST] A judge in New Jersey granted a divorce [ACLU-NJ press release] Friday to a lesbian couple married in Canada. Speaking from the bench, Superior Court Judge Mary Jacobson said her decision was in harmony with the state's tradition [AP report] of recognizing valid marriages performed outside the state, but cautioned that her ruling would not extend such recognition to areas other than divorce. The New Jersey Attorney General's office [official website] argued that the relationship should be dissolved as a civil union rather than recognized as a marriage, consistent with a 2007 Attorney General's opinion [JURIST report; PDF text]. The ACLU countered that such an outcome might leave the marriage intact in Canada and states that recognize same-sex marriages [JURIST news archive]. In 2006, New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine signed into law [JURIST report] legislation [PDF text] providing legal recognition to same-sex civil unions in New Jersey.

Late last month the Manhattan Surrogate Court [official website] ruled [JURIST report; PDF text] that the surviving partner of a same-sex marriage performed in Canada is entitled to inherit the estate of a deceased spouse in New York state.