[JURIST] The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] announced [press release] Thursday that suspected terrorist Najibullah Zazi has been charged [indictment, PDF] with conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction. A federal jury in the Eastern District of New York returned the one-count indictment Wednesday, alleging that Zazi conspired to bomb targets in the US. In a memorandum [text, PDF] in support of its motion for detention, the government alleged:

The evidence at trial will prove that the defendant conspired with others to detonate improvised explosive devices within the United States. In furtherance of the conspiracy, Zazi received detailed bomb-making instructions in Pakistan, purchased components of improvised explosive devices, and traveled to New York City on September 10, 2009 in furtherance of his criminal plans.

[JURIST] The UK Home Office [official website] has released a top terrorism suspect from a control order [Guardian backgrounder; JURIST news archive] that subjected him to virtual house arrest because it did not want to reveal secret evidence, according to media reports Thursday. Home Secretary Alan Johnson [official profile] sent letters [Guardian report] to lawyers for the man, known only as AE, notifying them that the decision was made after considering a June Law Lords ruling [judgment, PDF; JURIST report] requiring the government to let detainees and subjects of control orders know generally what charges they face so that they can mount a defense. Lawyers for AE called for a repeal of the entire control order system, saying that their client and his family and suffered irreparable harm.

There are still 14 control orders in force, and last week Johnson said that the government would undertake a review [JURIST report] of the system. Johnson issued a ministerial statement [text] saying that his "current assessment is ... that the control order regime remains viable," but that he would "be keeping this assessment under review." Earlier this month, the Home Office released another terrorism suspect [JURIST report] from a control order because it did not want to reveal secret evidence. In August, a control order against a suspected terrorist known as AN was overturned [judgment text; JURIST report] by the UK High Court. At that time Johnson had announced plans [BBC report] to draft a new control order against AN. The UK Law Lords ruled [JURIST report] in a series of decisions last October that the government can continue to impose control orders on terror suspects in lieu of detention, but said that some elements of the orders violate human rights. Control orders allow the British government to conduct surveillance and impose house arrest on suspects where there does not exist enough evidence to prosecute. The orders can also be used to forbid the use of mobile phones and the Internet.

[JURIST] Protesters took to Pittsburgh's streets Thursday in peaceful demonstrations calling attention to a range of global human rights issues on the first day of the Group of 20 (G-20) Summit [official websites]. A group of Tibetan protesters [WPXI report] from across the US held a march to call Chinese President Hu Jintao's attention to recent human rights abuses in that region [JURIST news archive]. The march is scheduled to continue Friday. Another group rallied for freedom to practice Falun Gong [Pittsburgh Tribune-Review report], a religion whose followers face persecution in China [JURIST news archive]. On Pittsburgh's North Side, a group of Burmese monks marched in protest of human rights conditions in Myanmar [JURIST news archive]. The Coalition of Ethiopians for Human Rights marched downtown seeking fair elections [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette report] in Ethiopia and the release of imprisoned opposition leader Birtukan Mideksa. Police presence has been increased throughout Pittsburgh, and some businesses, museums and educational institutions have boarded up or reinforced their windows along main thoroughfares in anticipation of continued protests that some fear might turn violent. Lawyers and trained legal observers [UPI report] from the National Lawyers Guild (NLG) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy websites] have congregated in Pittsburgh to monitor interactions between police and protesters. US President Barack Obama will host a dinner for delegates Thursday night, and the summit will continue through Friday.

Earlier this week, a federal judge declined to issue an injunction [Pittsburgh Post-Gazette report] in a lawsuit [JURIST report] filed against the City of Pittsburgh on behalf of two protest groups, alleging that police had violated their constitutional rights. Seeds of Peace and Three Rivers Climate Convergence (3RCC) [advocacy websites] claimed that police searched and seized members of the groups and their property in violation of the Fourth Amendment [text] and that police retaliated against members for exercising their right to free speech under the First Amendment [text]. Last week, the same judge ruled [JURIST report] that the City of Pittsburgh had to grant a permit allowing CodePink [advocacy website] to set up a tent city in a park days before the summit, but allowed the city to deny permits to two other protest groups.

[JURIST] The US House of Representatives Financial Services Committee [official website] heard testimony [materials; recorded video] Wednesday from banking industry regulators, but dismissed their prior efforts as ineffective. Comptroller of the Currency John Dugan, Director of the Office of Thrift Supervision John Bowman, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation chairman Sheila Blair defended [Reuters report] their past efforts, making a case for their continued oversight of the banking industry. In a prepared statement [text, PDF], Dugan said he agreed with many of the proposals currently being considered, but did not agree with an expanded regulatory role for the Federal Reserve or the broad power being considered for a Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). In response, Chairman Barney Frank criticized efforts [WSJ report] by the regulators to oversee the banking industry. By publicly dismissing current regulators' concerns and making concessions on the CFPA, it appears as though lawmakers are ready to move forward with plans [NYT report] for the new agency, which President Barack Obama proposed [JURIST report] in June.

Obama has repeatedly called for greater oversight of the banking industry. Earlier this month, Obama marked the one-year anniversary of the collapse of Lehman by calling for more stringent regulation [JURIST report] of the financial services industry. In July, the administration sent Congress draft legislation [JURIST report] laying out many of the proposals Obama had made in the June statement concerning the CFPA. Obama also made a plea for greater regulation [JURIST report] in a February speech to a joint session of Congress.

[JURIST] A US Department of Justice (DOJ) official told the Senate Judiciary Committee [official websites] Wednesday that the Obama administration supports the reauthorization [statement, PDF] of three provisions of the USA Patriot Act [JURIST news archive] set to expire at the end of the year. Assistant Attorney General for National Security David Kris [official profile] said that the administration supports renewing portions of the act that allow federal authorities to conduct "roving" wiretaps, compel the production of business, medical and library records, and designate suspects as "lone wolf" agents of a foreign power:

[T]he Department and the Administration believe that each of these three provisions provides important and effective investigative authorities. We believe that the current statutory scheme, together with the rules, guidelines, and oversight mechanisms observed by the Executive branch with respect to these authorities, safeguard Americans’ privacy and civil liberties.

[JURIST] The Obama administration will not push Congress for legislation to authorize the indefinite detention of terror suspects, the Washington Post reported [text] Wednesday. Instead, administration officials said they will rely on the authority granted through two resolutions passed in the wake of the 9/11 attacks: Senate Joint Resolution 23 and House Joint Resolution 64 [materials]. Those resolutions give the president the power, "to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations ... persons he determines ... in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such ... persons." While the administration will continue to rely on that authorization, it is unclear where future detainees may be housed, as the Department of Defense has recently indicated that they are still hoping to meet the January deadline [JURIST report] for the closure of the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive].

While the Obama administration decides on new detention policies, it also faces decisions on how to try suspected terrorists already facing charges. On Wednesday, Chief judge for military commissions Colonel James Pohl granted a government request to further postpone hearings for Saudi Guantanamo detainee Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Haza al Darbi until January 11, 2010. Earlier this week, the administration was granted a 60-day continuance [JURIST report] in the trial of five suspected terrorists, including the alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. That same day, Attorney General Eric Holder said that he would decide by November 16 whether to try the alleged terrorists in military or federal court [Miami Herald report].

[JURIST] A US military judge on Wednesday granted a government request to further postpone hearings for Saudi Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainee Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Haza al Darbi [DOD materials]. Chief judge for military commissions Colonel James Pohl set a January 11, 2010 date [Miami Herald report] for a hearing on which statements would be admissible at trial. Darbi claims that statements he made while detained, first at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and later at Guantanamo Bay, were elicited through torture and therefore should be excluded from the case against him. In May, Pohl granted [JURIST report] the government's motion for a continuance until September 24, following a previously granted continuance [ruling, PDF] in February. Darbi is accused of plotting an attack that never took place on a ship in the Strait of Hormuz and training at an al Qaeda camp. If convicted, he could face life in prison.

Darbi's case is one of six active military commission proceedings at Guantanamo. The government has also sought delays in the other cases. Earlier this week, Judge Stephen Henley granted [JURIST report] the government's request for a 60-day continuance [JURIST report] in the trial of five Guantanamo detainees accused of plotting the 9/11 attacks [JURIST news archive]. This is the government's third continuance in that case as well, having been granted 120-day continuances in January and May [JURIST reports]. Pentagon prosecutors said Attorney General Eric Holder will decide by November 16 [Miami Herald report] whether to continue the military commission proceeding or to transfer the case to federal court.

[JURIST] The Canadian Federal Court [official website] has ruled [judgment, PDF] that the Military Police Complaints Commission (MPCC) [official website] lacked the authority to investigate complaints that Canadian forces illegally transferred detainees to Afghan custody with the Canadian government's knowledge. Noting that the MPCC is limited to complaints regarding "the conduct of a member of the Military Police in the performance of police duties," Justice Sean Harrington said that detention, release, and transfer of detainees "relate[s] to military operations that resulted from established military custom or practice."

[MPCC] has no jurisdiction to inquire into the conduct of the military at large, much less the conduct of persons who are not members of the military. Thus, while the Commission may legitimately inquire as to what any member of the Military Police knew, or had the means of knowing, it would be an excess of jurisdiction to investigate government policy and to inquire as to the state of knowledge of the Government of Canada at large, and more particularly the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), and to the extent, if any, it had relevant information to question why that information was not shared with the Military Police.

[JURIST] UK Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer [official profile] published an interim policy on assisted suicide [press release] Wednesday that takes several factors into consideration in deciding whether to prosecute such cases. While the new policy does not legalize assisted suicide, it introduces public interest considerations that are to be weighed including compassion, age of the dying, the relation between the dying and those assisting, and the ability of the dying to make an informed decision. Maintaining that the new policy does not permit assisted suicide, Starmer said that prosecutors "must decide the importance of each public interest factor in the circumstances of each case" to determine which cases to prosecute. Public opinion on the issue will be gathered through a consultation process [materials] before a final policy is issued.

The interim policy was published pursuant to a July order [judgment text; JURIST report] from the UK Law Lords [official website] to clarify the issue. The order resulted from a case brought by Debbie Purdy, a multiple sclerosis sufferer, who wants to travel to Switzerland with her husband to end her life. Under the country's Suicide Act 1961 [text], Purdy's husband faces criminal liability for aiding her suicide in another country. Many Britons have reportedly gone to the Dignitas clinic [website, in German] in Switzerland to obtain assisted suicides. Also in July, the House of Lords rejected a bill [JURIST report] that would would have barred prosecuting those who go abroad to help others commit assisted suicide. Last year, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown [official website] spoke out against laws allowing assisted suicide [BBC report], saying that he would not create laws that "put pressure on people to end their lives."

[JURIST] US Attorney General Eric Holder [official profile] on Wednesday announced [memorandum, PDF] new state secrets [JURIST news archive] policies, seeking to establish greater government accountability and oversight. The new procedures and policies, set to take effect on October 1, are aimed at strengthening public confidence by limiting invocation of the state secrets privilege to instances where "genuine and significant harm to national defense or foreign relations is at stake." The new policies require approval by the attorney general and review by a committee comprised of senior Department of Justice (DOJ) officials. Additionally, the policies call for oversight by Congressional committees. The DOJ pledged [press release] not to invoke the privilege to conceal government wrongdoing or to avoid embarrassment. Holder called the new policies an "important step toward rebuilding the public's trust" while recognizing the importance of national security. The Constitution Project [advocacy website], which has previously called for [letter, PDF] state secrets reform, applauded the new policies [press release] but called for Congress to pass legislation to clarify that the judicial branch has the authority to determine what evidence is subject to the privilege. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] also called for legislative reform [press release] to reflect the new policies, maintaining that an outside check on the executive branch is needed. The State Secret Protection Act of 2009 [HR 984 materials], currently under consideration, aims at narrowing the application of the privilege.

The state secrets privilege, which allows the exclusion of evidence based on a government affidavit that such evidence may endanger national security, has been highly criticized by rights groups and others. Earlier this month, OpenTheGovernment.org [advocacy website] released a report [text, PDF] examining the privilege and other transparency issues, concluding that the current administration has improved transparency [JURIST report], but more should be done. In February, the Obama administration reasserted the state secrets privilege [JURIST report] in a lawsuit over CIA rendition flights, drawing criticism from advocacy groups including the ACLU. The DOJ is currently seeking an en banc rehearing of the case, in which the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled [JURIST reports] that the state secrets privilege does not bar a lawsuit against a company that allegedly provided logistical support for the flights.

[JURIST] The head of the Honduran interim government Roberto Micheletti on Tuesday called on [La Prensa report, in Spanish] Brazil to deliver deposed president Manuel Zelaya [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] under an arrest warrant [text and materials, PPT in Spanish] issued by the Honduran Supreme Court [official website, in Spanish] in June. Zelaya has taken refuge at the Brazilian Embassy [official website, in Spanish] since returning to Honduras Monday. The charges pending against Zelaya include crimes against the form of government, treason, abuse of authority, and usurping governmental powers to the detriment of the public administration and the State of Honduras. Honduran authorities have announced [La Tribuna report, in Spanish] that the curfew in place since 4:00PM Monday was lifted for a few hours Tuesday and Wednesday and will be lifted on Thursday morning. Despite the curfew, there has been widespread social unrest in the streets and there have been more than 100 arrests of suspected Zelaya supporters, as well as one death. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon [official website] said [UN News Centre report] Wednesday that "current conditions are not conducive to the holding of credible polls" scheduled for November, as he justified temporary suspension of assistance to the Honduran Supreme Electorate Court (TSE) [official website, in Spanish]. Amnesty International warned [press release] that "fundamental rights and the rule of law in [Honduras] are in grave danger."

Negotiations between Zelaya and Micheletti took place intermittently through Costa Rican President Oscar Arias until they were broken off in August by Micheletti, and the Supreme Court of Honduras unconditionally refused [criteria, PDF, in Spanish] to accept Zelaya's return to power regardless of terms. Zelaya also made several failed attempts to return to office, including attempting to fly into the country accompanied by international leaders. Also in August, the Supreme Court warned [JURIST report] that if Zelaya returned to the country, he would have to face the charges against him, while Micheletti announced that Honduras would go ahead with plans to hold elections. Zelaya was ousted [JURIST report] on June 28 following a judicial order [press release, in Spanish] asserting that he had broken Honduran law by attempting to conduct a controversial referendum on constitutional reform [JURIST report] contrary to a Honduran Supreme Court ruling.

[JURIST] The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) [official website] on Wednesday began the trial [press release] of former Rwandan minister of planning Augustin Ngirabatware [case materials] for his alleged involvement in the 1994 Rwandan genocide [BBC backgrounder]. Ngirabatware faces charges [indictment, PDF] of:

genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, complicity in genocide, direct and public incitements to committ genocide; crimes against humanity for murder, extermination, rape, inhumane acts; and serious violations of the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II.