 |
|

Legal news from Tuesday, February 10, 2009 |
 |
|


DOJ urges court not to define 'enemy combatant'
Safiya Boucaud on February 10, 2009 1:21 PM ET

[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] urged the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] Monday to refrain from addressing the definition of an enemy combatant [response, PDF], an exercise which the DOJ argues could force the Court to unnecessarily decide the scope of the President's military detention authority over prisoners at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive]. Responding to last month's order [text] in which the Court invited the government "to submit any refinement of their position on the appropriate definition of 'enemy combatant,'" the DOJ said President Barack Obama had ordered [executive order, text] a comprehensive, inter-agency review of the disposition of all detainees being held at Guantanamo and recommended that the Court deal with future detainee matters on a case-by-case basis, explaining: This...approach is consistent with longstanding practice of courts to decide only the narrow issues before them. It avoids holdings that are potentially unnecessary or unnecessarily broad concerning difficult and important questions. Particular cases may be subject to resolution without reaching broad questions about the scope of detention authority. Last month on rehearing, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled [opinion, PDF] that it had no jurisdiction over Guantanamo detainees' petitions [JURIST report] for subject-matter review of "enemy combatant" status decisions. The current definition of "enemy combatant" was set out last June by the Supreme Court in Boumediene v. Bush [opinion, PDF; JURIST report], which provided a broad basis for holding a prisoner without charges. The Court held that a suspect could be detained if it were shown that he or she had provided support to Taliban or al Qaeda forces, even absent direct involvement in hostilities with US forces abroad.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Italy legislature to hold right-to-die vote despite comatose woman's death
Devin Montgomery on February 10, 2009 1:13 PM ET

[JURIST] Italian lawmakers have said they still plan to vote [Corriere della Sera report] on legislation [draft text, in Italian] that would make it a crime to remove a feeding tube from a comatose patient, despite the death Monday of Eluana Englaro [materials, in Italian], the woman whose case gave rise to the bill. Following the announcement of the death [JURIST report], Italian health minister Maurizio Sacconi [official profile, in Italian] said debate and voting on the bill was still important to prevent the death from "being in vain." Englaro's death, which was reportedly earlier than expected given the removal of her feeding tube on Friday, is now being investigated [ANSA report] by the Italian Medical Association [official website, in Italian], but a spokesperson for the group said it was too early to determine if her doctors had acted appropriately. In reaction to the news of her death, organizations in other parts of Europe have also called for their governments [Deutsche Welle report] to create more definite rules on end-of-life decision making.
The removal of Englaro's feeding tube followed the refusal [JURIST report] of Italian President Giorgio Napolitano [BBC profile] to sign an order prohibiting the action. Napolitano said he could not issue the order given a decision [JURIST report] by the country's Court of Cassation [official website, in Italian] allowing removal of the tube. Euthanasia [JURIST news archive] is currently illegal in Italy [JURIST report], but the Court of Cassation distinguished between the removal of a feeding tube and more affirmative steps to end a patient's life.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Senate judiciary chair Leahy calls for 'truth commission' to investigate Bush policies
Safiya Boucaud on February 10, 2009 12:02 PM ET

[JURIST] US Senate Judiciary Committee [official website] chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) [official profile] Monday called for a South Africa-style truth commission [transcript] to investigate controversial actions by the George W. Bush administration, including justifications for the Iraq war, the treatment of military detainees, and the warrantless wiretapping [JURIST news archives] program. Speaking at Georgetown University, Leahy said there was a need to find balance between exposing Bush administration mistakes in order to avoid repeating them, and the desire to move forward rather than cast blame. Leahy suggested that a truth commission could accomplish that goal and that: [Lawmakers] could develop and authorize a person or group of people universally recognized as fair minded, and without axes to grind. Their straightforward mission would be to find the truth. People would be invited to come forward and share their knowledge and experiences, not for purposes of constructing criminal indictments, but to assemble the facts. If needed, such a process could involve subpoena powers, and even the authority to obtain immunity from prosecutions in order to get to the whole truth. Congress has already granted immunity, over my objection, to those who facilitated warrantless wiretaps and those who conducted cruel interrogations. It would be far better to use that authority to learn the truth. When asked about Leahy's proposal, President Barack Obama [official profile] said during a press conference [transcript] late Monday that he had not yet reviewed the plan, but added: "My view is... that nobody's above the law and, if there are clear instances of wrongdoing, that people should be prosecuted just like any ordinary citizen. But generally speaking, I'm more interested in looking forward than I am in looking backwards."
In January, members of the House Judiciary Committee also called for an investigation into the actions of Bush administration officials, and Obama has said that he would not rule out such an investigation [JURIST reports]. The Senate Armed Services Committee [official website] has alleged [report] that top Bush officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld [JURIST news archive], bore major responsibility for abuses committed by U.S. interrogators in military detention centers.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Federal judges order California to reduce prison population
Jay Carmella on February 10, 2009 8:57 AM ET

[JURIST] A special panel of federal judges tentatively ruled [opinion; PDF] on Monday that California must reduce its prison population in order to relieve overcrowding. Based on the evidence presented, the panel concluded that overcrowding has resulted in the state's failure to deliver constitutionally-adequate mental and physical health care to inmates. The panel found that a release order is the only appropriate remedy [18 USC § 3626] for the unconstitutional prison conditions, stating: Other forms of relief suggested by various participants are without adequate evidentiary support or appear infeasible as well as incapable of curing the violations presently existing in the California prison system. State Attorney General Jerry Brown opposed the decision, commenting [press release], "The courts tentative ruling is not constitutionally justified. Therefore, the state will appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court when the final order is issued." The release order would mean that prisons could only hold 120-145 percent of design capacity, requiring the early release of an estimated 36,000 to 57,000 inmates. Those opposed to the release order fear that the state does not have the funds for the support programs associated with the release of such a large number of inmates, but the panel asserted that decreasing the number of inmates could save the state $900 million annually in prison costs.
Overcrowding has been a significant problem for California prisons for many years. In August 2008, California's court-appointed prison medical overseer J. Clark Kelso [official profile] asked the court to force the state to pay $8 billion [JURIST report] over the next five years to improve prison hospitals and bring inmate healthcare up to constitutional standards. Two months earlier, a California court had ruled [JURIST report] that the state constitution permitted easing overcrowding by transferring prisoners to out-of-state facilities. The transfers had been ordered in an emergency proclamation [text; JURIST report] issued by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger [official website; JURIST news archive] in 2006.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Albania Supreme Court judge shot in Tirana
Andrew Morgan on February 10, 2009 8:47 AM ET

[JURIST] An Albania Supreme Court [official website] judge was shot four times outside his home in the capital Tirana, according to local police Monday. Ardian Nuni [official profile], a former law professor nominated to the high court in 2007, was hospitalized with non-life-threatening injuries to his shoulder and leg. The attack, which took place over the weekend, was described by the Supreme Court in a press release as a serious attack not only against the Supreme Court, but also against the judicial power of the Republic of Albania. This event, but also some others that have occurred in recent years against judges, court personnel, family members and their property, are a great concern not only for judges but for Albanian society as a whole, interested in the normal rule of law. The court added that the attacks have "negatively affected and distorted the perception by the public on the delivery of justice and impaired the authority of judges and the judiciary." Albanian Premier Sali Berisha condemned the latest attack [press release], urging authorities "to take all the measures to bring to justice the author of this extremely criminal act". Albanian police have detained 15 people for questioning in connection with the shooting.
Rights groups and anti-corruption monitors have pressed the Albanian government to take swift action against Nuni's assailants and continue the process of judicial reform in the country [background remarks]. Concerns over corruption and the influence of organized crime in particular have hindered [press statement] the process of Albania's ascension to the European Union (EU) [official website].


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Mexico publishes law establishing fingerprint database of mobile phone users
Andrew Gilmore on February 10, 2009 8:33 AM ET

[JURIST] The Mexican government published a law [draft text, in Spanish] Monday that will create a database of mobile phone users in the country, including vital information and fingerprints, once it takes effect in April. The law, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation [official website, in Spanish], amends certain provisions of the Federal Telecommunications Act, and was passed into law by the Mexican Congress last year. According to the draft law, the database will be established to combat extortion, threats, kidnapping, organized crime, and drug trafficking. The law will require mobile telecommunications firms to provide authorities with the name, address, nationality, identification number, and fingerprints of customers, as well as the type of communication utilizing the provider's network, in some cases. It is unclear [Reuters report] whether the Mexican government will provide any funding for the establishment of the database.
The Mexican law comes as governments worldwide attempt to reconcile free and open communications with the security threats presented by terrorism and organized criminal activity. In November, the UK government dropped [JURIST report] from its immediate legislative agenda a controversial security database bill that would have required telecoms to keep records of all domestic phone calls, e-mails, and Internet activity. Also in November, the lower house of the German parliament approved a new law that expanded the power [JURIST report] of the German federal police to undertake online and telephone surveillance. In June, the Swedish parliament passed a controversial wiretapping law [JURIST report] that gave the country's electronic surveillance agency broad authority to monitor international telephone and electronic communications passing through the country. In October 2007, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) refused to investigate [JURIST report] the involvement of US telecommunications firms in the US National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program [JURIST news archive].


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Former Taiwan first lady pleads guilty to money-laundering charges
Jay Carmella on February 10, 2009 7:37 AM ET

[JURIST] Wu Shu-Chen, the wife of former Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian [BBC profile; JURIST news archive], pleaded guilty Tuesday to charges of money-laundering and forgery, but denied charges that she embezzled from the presidential state affairs fund. Wu claims the money was a political donation [Taiwan News report], and was not for personal use or bribery. Tuesday marked Wu's first appearance since she was initially indicted in 2006 [JURIST report]. The court had excused her due to health concerns after she collapsed at the onset of the proceedings in 2006. The trial is one of many tied to the administration of the former president, who was indicted [JURIST report] last year by Taiwanese prosecutors on charges including embezzlement, receiving bribes, forgery, and money laundering.
In addition to charging Wu and Chen, prosecutors have indicted their son and daughter-in-law, three former presidential aides, and eight other associates and family members. Last week, Chen's sister-in-law pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to charges that she had forged documents and transferred money to bank accounts upon orders from Chen and Wu. Chen has been detained since his arrest in November, and last month Taiwan's High Court rejected his appeal of the decision to detain him [JURIST reports] while he awaits trial.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|

Madoff reaches agreement with SEC on civil charges as SEC regulator steps down
Andrew Gilmore on February 10, 2009 7:09 AM ET

[JURIST] US financier Bernard Madoff [JURIST news archive] consented to a partial judgment [SEC press release] with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website] Monday over civil charges brought by the SEC to obtain a preliminary injunction and asset freeze against him. According to the SEC, the agreement will continue the previously imposed preliminary injunction, but in consenting to the agreement, Madoff will neither admit nor deny the SEC's allegations. The agreement between the SEC and Madoff must be approved by Judge Louis Stanton of the US District Court for the Southern District of New York [court website]. Criminal securities fraud charges [JURIST report] filed against Madoff are not affected by Monday's agreement. Also on Monday, SEC Division of Enforcement Director Linda Thomsen announced she was stepping down from her post [SEC press release]. Thomsen had been with the SEC since 1995 and had recently given testimony [JURIST report] before the US Senate Banking Committee concerning SEC enforcement and the Madoff scandal.
In the week following Madoff's charges, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox [official profile] said that he would launch an immediate investigation [press release; JURIST report] into how the fraud allegedly perpetrated by Madoff went undetected for so long. In December, then-President-elect Barack Obama [official profile] named [press release] Mary Schapiro [professional profile] as the SEC Chairman, replacing Cox. Madoff was charged with securities fraud in December for allegedly violating the anti-fraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 [texts]. UK financial firm Bramdean Alternatives Limited [corporate website] raised concerns [statement, DOC; JURIST report] about the US financial regulatory process after its value dropped by more than 35 percent following news of its exposure to the fraud.


Link |
|
subscribe |
|
latest newscast |
archive |
Facebook page

|
| For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...
|
|
|