 |
|

Legal news from Monday, February 8, 2010 |
 |
|


Iran opposition leader sentenced to six years in prison for post-election protests
Carrie Schimizzi on February 8, 2010 12:48 PM ET

[JURIST] Former Iranian deputy foreign minister Mohsen Aminzadeh has been sentenced [ISNA report, in Persian] to six years in prison for his participation in protesting last year's contested Iranian presidential election [JURIST news archive], state-run Iranian Students News Agency (ISNA) [media website, in Persian] reported Monday. Aminzadeh was a leading member of the Islamic Iran Participation Front and a supporter of Green Movement leader Mir Hossein Moussavi [JURIST news archive] during the June 2009 election. He was an outspoken critic of the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad [BBC profile; JURIST news archive]. According to ISNA, Aminzadeh was convicted by a Revolutionary Court in Tehran of conspiring to disturb security and spreading propaganda. The Iranian government has yet to officially confirm Aminzadehs sentence.
Aminzadeh is one of the highest-ranking opposition officials to be convicted for protesting the highly disputed presidential election. Last month, Iran's Prosecutor-General Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei called for sedition trials [JURIST report] against leaders of protests following the presidential election. Earlier this month, Fars News Agency [official website] reported [JURIST report] that Iran will soon execute nine people for their roles in the post-election protests. The nine protesters were charged with the capital crime of moharebeh, which means waging war against God. Two others were executed [JURIST report] for the same crime in January. Mousavi has condemned the hangings, which he views as being aimed at deterring protesters from taking to the streets on February 11, the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution [BBC backgrounder].


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

|

ICC drops charges against Sudan rebel leader
Megan McKee on February 8, 2010 12:04 PM ET

[JURIST] The International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] on Monday declined to confirm charges [judgment, PDF; press release] against Darfur rebel chief Bahr Idriss Abu Garda [case materials; JURIST news archive]. The ruling came after a preliminary hearing [JURIST report] in October to address war crimes charges that arose out of Abu Garda's alleged involvement in the September 2007 attacks [BBC report] against a peacekeeping mission located in North-Darfur. Despite the pre-trial chamber's finding that the mission was entitled to civilian protection under the international law of armed conflicts, and that the case was of the appropriate severity to move forward, the chamber unanimously found that the prosecution did not sufficiently demonstrate that the charges against Abu Garda could withstand scrutiny at trial. If the prosecution provides additional evidence, it may still seek the confirmation of the charges, or it may petition the chamber to appeal the decision.
The ICC completed [JURIST report] the confirmation of charges hearing in October, during which prosecutors alleged that Abu Garda controlled the Justice and Equality Movement [official website, in Arabic] during the 2007 attacks, which resulted in the death of 12 African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS) soldiers and several injuries. The defense argued that Abu Garda is not responsible for the attack and that the AMIS had lost its protected status [video] under international law, making it a legitimate military target. Abu Garda is the first suspect to appear before the ICC with regard to the Darfur situation [JURIST news archive], making his first appearance [JURIST report] in May 2009 to deny responsibility for war crimes.


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

|

UK judge criticizes banning of Sikh ceremonial dagger in public places
Ann Riley on February 8, 2010 10:53 AM ET

[JURIST] Sir Mota Singh QC, Britains first Asian judge, said in an interview with BBC's Asian Network Monday that Sikhs [JURIST news archive] should be permitted to wear their ceremonial daggers [BBC report] to school and other public places. Sikhism requires that Sikh males wear the ceremonial dagger, known as a kirpan [Sikh Coalition backgrounder], at all times, but they are forbidden to use it as a weapon. Sir Mota, who is now retired, made his comments following several recent high-profile cases in which Sikhs have been asked to remove their kirpans, turbans, and other religious garb in the workplace or school. In October, a British employment tribunal awarded a Sikh policeman £10,000 for indirect racial and religious discrimination and harassment [Guardian report] after he was ordered to remove his turban during riot training. Also last year, a boy was forced to leave [Telegraph report] the Compton School in Barnet, north London for wearing a kirpan. His family has not yet brought a discrimination claim against the school. In 2008, the British High Court ruled in favor [Daily Mail report] of 14-year-old Sarika Singh after she was disciplined by her school for wearing a steel bangle, a symbol of Sikh faith called a Kara, breaking the school's "no jewelry" rule.
Sir Mota's comments come in the context of years of international tension over the wearing of religious dress [JURIST news archive]. In 2007, the US Transportation Security Administration (TSA) [official website] revised security procedures relating to headwear, after Sikhs criticized [JURIST reports] the potential for religious profiling. In 2006, the Supreme Court of Canada [official website] overturned [JURIST report] a Quebec school board's ban on carrying Sikh ceremonial daggers at school, ruling that it infringed students' religious freedom under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [text]. The French Conseil d'Etat [official website] held [JURIST report] in 2006 that Sikhs have to remove their turbans to be photographed for driver's licenses as a matter of public security.


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

|

Obama still considering NYC trial for 9/11 suspects
Dwyer Arce on February 8, 2010 9:40 AM ET

[JURIST] US President Barack Obama said Sunday in an interview [video] with CBS News that he hasn't ruled out a civilian trial in New York City for accused 9/11 co-conspirator Khalid Sheikh Mohammed [JURIST news archive]. However, Obama stressed that he was considering the logistical and security issues that have been presented in making the decision. The Obama administration has faced growing objections from New York City and state officials, and criticism over the planned trials since they were first announced [JURIST reports] in November. Responding to those critical of his plans, Obama stated: I think that the important thing for the public to understand is we're not handling any of these cases any different than the Bush administration handled them all through 9/11. They prosecuted 190 folks in these Article III courts, got convictions and those folks are in maximum security prisons right now. And there have been no escapes. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) [official website] responded [AP report] shortly after the interview, saying that the logistical and security concerns rendered the administration's current plans infeasible, and that the plans should be dropped. Congressman Pete King (R-NY) [official website] echoed these sentiments [Daily News report], adding that Mohammed should be tried by the military, instead of putting New Yorkers at greater risk.
In January, a senior administration official announced that the White House was considering moving [JURIST report] the trials of Mohammed and other high-profile terror suspects out of New York City. Two days before, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg [official website] cited costs and potential disruptions to the lives of New Yorkers in urging [JURIST report] the federal government not to use the city as a venue for the trials. Earlier this month, Bloomberg claimed [JURIST report] that providing security for the trial in New York would cost the city more than $216 million in the first year and $206 million in any additional years. Bloomberg originally backed the idea of trying some of the terrorists currently held at Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] in Manhattan due to its proximity to ground zero and the symbolic significance of convicting the suspects there.


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

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