[JURIST] The Supreme Court of Canada [official website] on Friday upheld [judgment text] the right of Wal-Mart Inc. [corporate website, JURIST news archive], the world's largest retailer, to close its operations in Jonquiere, Quebec, shortly after a union attempted to organize employees in 2005. In a 6-3 decision, the court held that there was no law or precedent that forced an employer to stay in business. The suit was filed by laid off Wal-Mart workers who claimed that the retailer violated labor laws by shutting down its operations while negotiations were taking place for a collective agreement. The former employees also alleged that Wal-Mart had a history of being anti-union and that the closure of the store was a direct attack against the employees being involved with the union. The former employees brought suit under section 17 of the Quebec Labour Code [CanLII materials], which states that an employee may not be sanctioned for exercising any right under the Code. The court indicated that the former employees could have brought suit under section 12 instead, noting that:

A claim under s. 12 is logical because the essential thrust of the appellant's position is not that he alone or with some colleagues was singled out for discriminatory treatment but that Wal-Mart targeted generally the rights of all employees at the Jonquiere store (and elsewhere). Jobs were lost not only by union supporters but by others who were indifferent about the union or who were altogether against union representation.

[JURIST] Accused former Khmer Rouge leader Kaing Guek Eav [TrialWatch profile; JURIST news archive], more commonly known as "Duch," unexpectedly asked to be released at the close of his trial on Friday. His request before the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) [official website] was a complete departure [NYT report] from his previous conduct, as he has cooperated with the trial and repeatedly apologized to his victims and their families. His lawyers took different approaches in their closing remarks, with one stating that his client was not guilty and the other asking for clemency. If Kaing is found guilty, he will serve 40 years in jail, so long as this departure from his earlier cooperation does not return him to the maximum sentence of life imprisonment [LAT report]. A verdict is expected in March.

Kaing is the first of eight ex-Khmer Rouge officials expected to be tried before the ECCC, which recently announced the establishment of an independent counselor to oversee anti-corruption efforts [JURIST reports]. In August Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] asked the ECCC to determine the scope of its prosecutions [JURIST report] "to thwart growing perceptions that court decisions are directed by the government." In February, HRW warned that ECCC trials were in danger of being tainted for their failure to follow fair trial standards, and in January a Cambodian court agreed to hear a corruption case [JURIST reports] involving two ECCC judges.

[JURIST] Enforcement of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) [HR 4411 materials] was delayed Friday until June 1, 2010, according to a joint statement [text, PDF] from the US Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve [official websites]. The UIGEA, which bans banks and financial institutions from intentionally accepting payments from credit cards, checks, or electronic fund transfers related to unlawful Internet bets was scheduled to take effect on December 1, 2009. The delay will give US banks and financial institutions six months to get in compliance with the new rules designed to curb Internet gambling. The joint statement, which elaborates on the reasons for postponement, states that:

The petitioners assert that an extension of the compliance date is necessary because a significant number of regulated entities will not have in place the necessary policies and procedures by the current December 1, 2009 compliance date. Petitioners assert that many small regulated entities do not have the resources necessary to develop and implement appropriate policies and procedures by the December 1, 2009 compliance date and cite the possibility of confusion regarding the term “unlawful Internet gambling.”

[JURIST] Italian judges announced Friday that the corruption trial of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi [official profile, in Italian; BBC profile] will resume on December 4. The trial had been temporarily halted [Corriere della Sera report, in Italian] after the court ruled against Berlusconi's claim for immunity while he is in office. The trial is set to re-open amid controversy surrounding a bill [Xinhua report] that Berlusconi's supporters have introduced to parliament. The bill would shorten the amount of time prosecutors have to bring some charges to trial, including corruption charges. The bill has not yet been voted on, and parliament would also have to apply it retroactively to apply to Berlusconi's cases.

The corruption charges stem from reported payments from Berlusconi to his former lawyer David Mills [JURIST news archive] in order for Mills to provide false testimony at two trials in 1997 and 1998 involving Berlusconi's broadcasting company, Mediaset [corporate website, in Italian]. Last week, Berlusconi's separate trial for tax fraud was suspended until January [JURIST report]. In October, the Italian Constitutional Court [official website, in Italian] struck down [JURIST report] the 2008 law granting immunity from prosecution to the four highest officials of the country, finding it unconstitutional. Berlusconi has faced trial on at least six occasions involving charges of false accounting, tax fraud, money laundering, embezzlement, and giving false testimony [JURIST reports]. In October 2007, Berlusconi's April 2007 acquittal [JURIST reports] on bribery charges was upheld. In 2005, Berlusconi was acquitted of corruption charges despite testimony accusing him of giving kickbacks to the late Socialist premier Bettino Craxi [JURIST report].