 |
|

Legal news from Thursday, May 27, 2010 |
 |
|


Japan court begins trial of anti-whaling activist
Sarah Miley on May 27, 2010 2:17 PM ET

[JURIST] The Tokyo District Court [official website] on Wednesday began [Sea Shepherd press release] the trial of New Zealand anti-whaling activist Peter Bethune on five criminal charges in connection with boarding a Japanese whaling vessel as part of a protest in the Antarctic. The Japanese court system does not accept pleas before trial, but Bethune has made admission of guilt for four of the charges including trespass, destruction of property, illegal possession of a weapon and obstruction of business. He has denied the assault charge filed against him which stems from allegations that Bethune threw cartons of rancid butter at the vessel and injured a Japanese crewman in the process. If convicted, Bethune could face a prison term ranging from 15-25 years [TVNZ report], but his lawyer has indicated that the prosecutor may seek a sentence of two-and-a-half to three years. A verdict is expected [Daily Yomiuri report] as early as next month.
Bethune's charges [JURIST report] stem from boarding the Shanon Maru II, a Japanese whaling vessel, in response to a January 6 collision with the anti-whaling vessel, the Ady Gil, which he captained. As a result of the collision, the bow of the Ady Gil was sheared off, and the crew was rescued by another ship. On February 15, Bethune allegedly approached the Shanon Maru II ship on a jet ski, cut through anti-boarding netting surrounding the ship, boarded the ship, and then presented its captain with a bill for $3 million in damage done to his ship. He was taken into custody and returned to Tokyo where he was arrested by the Japanese Coast Guard. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society [advocacy website], of which Bethune is a member, has criticized [press release] the indictment, saying the "charges are bogus" and that the group "questions the credibility of the entire Japanese judicial system for entertaining such absurdities." The group claims that Bethune is being held for "purely political reasons" in order set an example for anti-whaling activists.


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

|

Israel high court chief criticizes government for violating West Bank building injunction
Dwyer Arce on May 27, 2010 11:20 AM ET

[JURIST] President Dorit Beinisch [official profile] of the Supreme Court of Israel [official website, in Hebrew] on Wednesday criticized the Israeli government for ignoring an injunction against building an access road on Palestinian lands. The road would connect two West Bank settlements [CSM backgrounder] - Hayovel, a settlement that is illegal under Israeli law, and the legal Eli settlement. Beinisch ordered [Haaretz report] the government to explain why the injunction had been violated within 45 days and to justify the damage done to private property during construction. The Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria issued an injunction [JP report] against further construction in April 2009 after lawyers for Yesh Din [advocacy website], an Israeli human rights groups, brought suit alleging that paving the proposed road would cross privately owned lands and cut off the Palestinian village of Karyut from portions of surrounding farmland.
Earlier this month, Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] alleged in a report [JURIST report] that on at least 12 separate occasions, Israeli forces destroyed civilian property [press release], including homes, factories, farms, and greenhouses, without any lawful military purpose during the 2008-2009 Operation Cast Lead [GlobalSecurity backgrounder; JURIST news archive] in the Gaza Strip [BBC backgrounder]. In March, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [official profile] called [JURIST report] Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank "illegal." The statement came two weeks after Israel announced [Haaretz report] the construction of 1,600 new housing units in East Jerusalem [GlobalSecurity backgrounder], where Palestinians hope to establish the capital of a future state.


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

|

US lawmakers mull bill to increase scrutiny of Guantanamo lawyers
Sarah Miley on May 27, 2010 10:56 AM ET

[JURIST] US lawmakers are currently considering a Department of Defense (DOD) [official website] appropriations bill containing a section that would allow increased investigation by the Pentagon into the practices of lawyers representing Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees. Section 1037 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 [text, PDF] would allow the Pentagon's inspector general to conduct investigations if there is reasonable suspicion that a Guantanamo lawyer is interfering with DOD detention facility operations, violating DOD policy, violating any law that is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the inspector general, or generating a "material risk" to a member of the armed forces. Results from these investigations are reported back to Congress. The American Bar Association [association website] opposes the provision [press release], with President Carolyn Lamm stating Wednesday that the Department of Justice is the appropriate agency to investigate and prosecute lawyers for misconduct, not the DOD:[The DOD legislation] will compromise the professional independence of counsel and divert already starved defense resources from defending clients to defending the conduct, practices, actions and strategies of their lawyers. The American system of justice depends on the essential role of lawyers in counseling their clients. This includes providing zealous and effective counsel, even to those accused of heinous crimes against this nation in the name of causes that evoke our contempt...[Lawyers] who engage in inappropriate conduct or counsel a client to engage in conduct that is criminal or fraudulent are subject to the disciplinary authority of the jurisdiction(s) in which they are admitted to practice. The provision was proposed in response alleged malpractice [NYT report] by detainee lawyers, specifically allegations stemming from lawyers utilizing the John Adams Project [official website], a research and legal assistance organization. Representative Jeff Miller (R-FL) [official website] claims that researchers from the project supplied lawyers with pictures of interrogators to show their detainee clients. Guantanamo lawyers have rebuffed these statements, saying the pictures were acquired to use in trial for detainees who claim to have been illegally interrogated. Opponents of the bill have asked the provision to be thrown out before it is put up for a vote before the US House of Representatives this week.
The DOD appropriations bill, which was unanimously passed by the House Armed Services Committee [official website] last week, has also been a point of contention in the effort to shut down Guantanamo Bay. If passed, the legislation will prohibit [JURIST report] the Obama administration from modifying or building a facility in the US to hold detainees currently held at the detention facility. The bill requires [summary, PDF] that any plan to construct or modify US facilities to accommodate Guantanamo transfers be "accompanied by a thorough and comprehensive plan that outlines the merits, costs, and risks associated with utilizing such a facility." As the Obama administration has not presented such a plan to Congress, the bill prohibits the use of any funds for the purpose of preparing a US facility for Guantanamo transfers. The Obama administration continues its push to close the Guantanamo Bay facility, despite missing its self-imposed one-year deadline [JURIST report] in January.


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

|

Lehman Brothers sues JPMorgan for billions over collapse
Sarah Miley on May 27, 2010 8:51 AM ET

[JURIST] Lehman Brothers Holdings [corporate website] on Wednesday filed suit [complaint, PDF] against JPMorgan Chase & Co. [corporate website] for allegedly "siphoning" off billions of dollars in "critically-needed" assets days before the investment bank filed for a record-breaking bankruptcy. JPMorgan was Lehman's main short-term lender before its collapse and acted acted as a middleman between Lehman and its investors. In the complaint, Lehman accused JPMorgan executives of using inside knowledge to take advantage of Lehman during its financial downfall and pressured the brokerage firm to turn over $8.6 billion in collateral in September 2008. The last-minute transactions allegedly accelerated Lehman's free fall into bankruptcy, costing the investment bank tens of billions of dollars in "lost value." The complaint, which was filed in the US Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York [official
website] in Manhattan, is seeking monetary relief for JPMorgan's contribution in Lehman's downfall as a result of its wrongful conduct:JPMorgan's insistence on the new agreements in August and September 2008, its unjustified demands for billions in additional collateral, and its refusal to return that collateral in the critical days before [Lehman's] bankruptcy filing, severely constrained [Lehman's] liquidity and impeded its ability to pursue and implement alternatives and initiatives that would have resulted in the preservation of billions in value. Instead, [Lehman's] liquidity constraints compelled an exigent chapter 11 filing that has resulted in tens of billions of dollars in additional lost value to the [Lehman] estate and its creditors. ... It is now too late to undo all the harm caused by the [Lehman] bankruptcy. It is not too late, however, to return to [Lehman's] estate and its creditors the billions of dollars of [Lehman] assets that JPMorgan illegally converted and continues to hold, and to compensate [Lehman] for all the damages that flow directly from JPMorgan's misconduct. This lawsuit seeks to return that value to the [Lehman] estate and to restore all of the creditors to the position they would have occupied but for JPMorgan's wrongful conduct. A spokesperson for JPMorgan responded to the complaint [WSJ report] calling the suit "ill-conceived and meritless." In March, a bankruptcy judge approved an accord providing for JPMorgan to return several billion dollars of assets to Lehman's estate but giving Lehman a right to sue
further.
The collapse of complex financial firms such as Lehman Brothers has spurred government action to increase regulation and oversight. Last week, the US Senate [official website] passed [JURIST report] the Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010 [S 3217 materials], focused on increasing regulation in the financial sector following the recent economic crisis [JURIST news archive]. The bill creates a new regulatory council to monitor financial institutions in order to prevent the companies from becoming "too big to fail." It also gives the Federal Reserve [official website] the power to supervise the largest financial companies and report to the government any risks the firms may pose to the economy at large. Additionally, a new consumer protection division will be established within the Federal Reserve to enforce rules against certain business practices like abusive mortgage lending and some credit card practices. As a final protection against future bailouts, the government will have the ability to seize and liquidate failing financial institutions before their collapse can have an adverse affect on the entire economy. US President Barack Obama praised the bill, but opponents of the legislation expressed concern that its passage will stifle the economy. The Senate bill has to be reconciled with the bill passed last December [JURIST report] by the US House of Representatives [official website] before Obama can sign it into law.


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

|

Obama to send 1200 National Guard troops to US-Mexico border
Dwyer Arce on May 27, 2010 8:42 AM ET

[JURIST] The Obama administration confirmed Tuesday that it will send 1,200 National Guard [official website] troops to the US-Mexican border in an effort to deter drug smuggling and illegal immigration. They will join the 300 National Guard troops and 26,000 border and customs officials already stationed at the border. The troops will assist [AP report] border agents in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, but will not be directly engaged in law enforcement activities. Additionally, the administration will request a $500 million supplemental appropriations bill from Congress in order to assist in law enforcement efforts along the border. Texas Governor Rick Perry (R) [official website] has expressed support [Miami Herald report] for the move, describing it as a good start. Arizona Senators John McCain (R) and Jon Kyl (R) [official websites] also described [press release] it as an "important first step," but continued:[T]he President is not sending enough troops. We believe the situation on the border is far worse today than it was [in 2006] due to the escalating violence between the Mexican drug cartels and the Mexican government. For this reason, we need to deploy at least 6,000 National Guard troops to the border region. The fact that President Obama announced today that he will only be sending one-fifth of the troops we believe are required is a weak start and does not demonstrate an understanding of the current situation in the region. McCain and Kyl introduced an amendment [text, PDF] on Wednesday that would appropriate $250 million of unused funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 [text, PDF] to fund the deployment of 6,000 troops.
The deployment comes amid an effort by President Barack Obama to garner Republican support for proposed immigration reform legislation. Renewed pressure for congressional action on the issue has come after Arizona passed a bill [JURIST report] making it a state crime to be in the country illegally and requiring state police to verify the immigration status of those suspected of being in the country illegally. The bill has faced sharp criticism from Obama, Mexican President Felipe Calderon, and the international community [JURIST reports]. The effort is the first attempt at immigration reform since the failed [JURIST report] Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill [S 1639 materials] in 2007. In 2006, former US president George W. Bush [official profile] announced [JURIST report] the deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops to the Mexican border as a prime element in a wide-ranging plan to 'fix' problems created by illegal immigration.


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

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