Iran has faced criticism for its efforts to curtail the activities of bloggers and journalists. Earlier this month, Branch 26 of the Revolutionary Court of Iran [GlobaLex backgrounder] sentenced [JURIST report] Shiva Nazar Ahari, a journalist arrested following the 2009 presidential election [JURIST news archive], to six years in prison. During the Tehran trial, conducted by head judge Pyrabasy, Ahari faced charges of warring against God [CHRR report], known in Islamic law as Moharebeh, conspiring to commit a crime, propaganda against the revolution and disturbing the public order, violating several articles of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran [Mehr backgrounder]. In May, RSF included Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad [BBC profiles] of Iran in a report listing 40 "Predators of Press Freedom" [JURIST report] throughout the world. Pyrabasy previously presided over the trial of Mohammad Nourizad, a prominent Iranian journalist and filmmaker, who was sentenced in April to three-and-a-half years [JURIST report] in prison and 50 lashes for his activities after the 2009 elections. Nourizad was sentenced for "distributing propaganda against the establishment of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and desecrating the image of thirty years of the Islamic establishment," and insulting the supreme leader, the president, the head of the judiciary and Ayatollah Elmolhoda of the Assembly of Experts. In December, Iranian economist and journalist Saeed Laylaz was sentenced to a nine-year jail term [JURIST report] for possessing classified information and participating in protests following the 2009 elections. Thousands were arrested during the protests following the contested election.

The Peace and Democracy Party was created on the basis of the Democratic Society Party, which was banned [JURIST report] by Turkey's Constitutional Court [official website, in Turkish] in December 2009 because the party was cooperating with the PKK. Earlier this year, Turkish politician and Kurdish rights activist Leyla Zana [NNDB profile] was sentenced to three years in prison for spreading terrorist propaganda. Zana was convicted [Zaman report, in Turkish] by a court in the city of Diyarbakir for two speeches delivered at the Kurdish political congress and protest in 2008. Zana has previously been convicted for spreading propaganda under Turkey's anti-terrorism laws, most recently facing a 10-year sentence [JURIST report] in 2008 for supporting the PKK.

The court will also hear the case of Kentucky v. King [docket; cert. petition, PDF] to determine when lawful police action impermissibly "creates" exigent circumstances that preclude warrantless arrests. The case was appealed from the Supreme Court of Kentucky [official website] to determine which of the five tests currently being used by US circuit courts should be used to determine this issue. The Kentucky court held [opinion, PDF] that the officers were not in hot pursuit of a fleeing criminal and, therefore, the exigent circumstances used to validate the warrantless arrest were self-created.

In Astra USA, Inc. v. Santa Clara County [docket; cert. petition, PDF] the court will determine whether, in the absence of a private right of action to enforce a statute, federal courts have the federal common law authority to confer a private right of action simply because the statutory requirement sought to be enforced is embodied in a contract. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held [opinion, PDF] that a plaintiff as a third party beneficiary has a private right of action under federal common law to enforce pricing requirements under the Public Health Service Act [42 USC § 256b text], even though the sct does not contain an express or implied private right of action. Newly-appointed justice, Elena Kagan, will be recused from this case.

The court will also hear the case of Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T, Inc. [docket; cert. petition, PDF] to determine whether exemption 7(c) of the Freedom of Information Act [5 USC § 552 text] protects the "privacy" of corporate entities. The exemption excludes from mandatory disclosure records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes when such disclosure could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of "personal privacy." Kagan is recused from this case.

In the consolidated cases of General Dynamics Corp. v. United States [docket; cert. petition, PDF] and The Boeing Company v. United States [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will determine whether, under the Due Process Clause, the government can maintain its claim against a party when it invokes the state secrets privilege [JURIST news archive] to completely deny that party prima facie defense to the claim. General Dynamics and Boeing had a fixed-price contract to build an aircraft carrier-based version of the "stealth" fighter plane, but ran into difficulty meeting deadlines and producing models. The companies claim that these issues were the result of the Navy's refusal to release access to secret technology about the land-based "stealth" fighter under the state secrets doctrine. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the Navy was justified in canceling the contract because the companies were not fulfilling their contractual obligations.

In J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will consider whether a "new reality" of "a contemporary international economy" permits a state to exercise, in
personam jurisdiction over a foreign manufacturer pursuant to the stream of commerce theory solely because the manufacturer targets the US market for the sale of its product and the product is purchased by a forum state consumer. The case involves an accident in a New Jersey scrap metal facility on a machine made by a British company that sold the machine through an unaffiliated distributor. The Supreme Court of New Jersey ruled [opinion text] that a foreign manufacturer that places a defective product in the stream of commerce through a distribution scheme that targets a national market, which includes New Jersey, may be subject to the in personam jurisdiction of a New Jersey court in a product-liability action.

That case will be argued in tandem with Goodyear v. Brown [docket; cert. petition, PDF], in which the court will decide whether a foreign corporation is subject to general personal jurisdiction, on causes of action not arising out of or related to any contacts between it and the forum state, merely because other entities distribute in the forum state products placed in the stream of commerce by the defendant. This case involves the death of two North Carolina youths in France when a tire made in Turkey failed and the bus in which they were riding crashed. The Court of Appeals of North Carolina ruled [opinion, PDF] that defendants were subject to personal jurisdiction.

In United States v. Tinklenberg [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will decide whether the time between the filing of a pretrial motion and its disposition is automatically excluded from the deadline for commencing trial under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974 [18 USC § 3161(h)(1)(D) text] or is instead excluded only if the motion actually causes a postponement, or the expectation of a postponement, of the trial. The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled [opinion, PDF] that Jason Louis Tinklenberg's trial violated the Speedy Trial Act. Kagan is recused from this case.

In Stern v. Marshall [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will revisit the estate battle [JURIST report] of model Anna Nicole Smith (Vickie Lynn Marshall).

In Schindler Elevator Corp. v. US ex rel. Kirk [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the court will decide whether a federal agency's response to a Freedom of Information Act [text; JURIST news archive] request is a "report ... or investigation" within the meaning of the False Claims Act public disclosure bar [31 USC § 3730(e)(4)].

The court also granted certiorari in Freeman v. United States, Bullcoming v. New Mexico and Sykes v. United States [dockets].

Despite increased international efforts, Somali pirates continue to be a concern in the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean. Last week, a Kenyan court convicted [JURIST report] seven Somali pirates and sentenced them to five years in prison. Earlier this month, a Kenyan court convicted [JURIST report] seven other Somali pirates, giving them the same five-year sentences. The maximum sentence under Kenyan law for piracy is life imprisonment, and the EU Naval Force Somalia (EU NAVFOR) [official website], a naval force that has been deployed to deal with the surge of piracy off the coast of Somalia, refuses to turn over suspects unless capital punishment is off the table. In July, a court in Seychelles convicted and sentenced [JURIST report] a group of Somali pirates to 10 years in prison following the attempted hijacking of Seychelles coastguard ship. In June, the UN announced the opening of a new high-security courtroom [JURIST report] in Kenya that will hear piracy cases. The announcement came after the UN announced $9.3 million in donations [JURIST report] to help fund piracy courts in Kenya and Seychelles.

Amnesty International considers that acceptable conditions for the return - forcible or otherwise - of people hailing from minority communities ... do not exist at the present time in Kosovo. The organization does not consider that conditions have, as of yet, sufficiently changed on the grounds in Kosovo so as to provide a fundamental (major, profound and stable) and durable change in circumstances. The situation at present and for the longer-term is consequently both unstable and uncertain.

The issue of how EU members and Kosovo should handle the Roma migrants and other ethnic groups has received a considerable amount of international attention, with France being the latest target. Earlier this month, the EU Commissioner for Justice, Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Viviane Reding [official profile] threatened legal action [JURIST report] against France for its deportation of Roma, calling the initiative "a disgrace." Also this month, more than 100,000 people in 130 cities across France protested the security policies of President Nicolas Sarkozy [official website, in French], including his decision to deport [JURIST reports] the illegal Roma. However, such policies [JURIST comment] are not new for France. In August, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination [official website] unveiled a review [JURIST report] of France's compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) [text]. The report raised questions about draft legislation that would strip naturalized citizens of citizenship for committing certain crimes and the decision to dismantle 300 unauthorized Roma encampments.

The battle in California over proper lethal injection procedures has been ongoing since 2006 when Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger [official website], in response to court rulings creating a virtual moratorium of all executions in the state, ordered [JURIST report] his administration to "correct court-identified deficiencies in California's lethal injection protocol to ensure the death penalty procedure is constitutional." Schwarzenegger submitted a proposal in 2007 [JURIST report] regarding changes to the state's protocol, including authorization to construct a new execution chamber. California's new lethal injection protocol became effective on August 29, 2010.

11:00 PM ET - US District Court Judge Jeremy Fogel stayed the execution, which had been scheduled for Thursday. While Fogel's decision can still be appealed, if the execution does not take place before Friday, the state will be unable to conduct any executions for several months because of the expiration of the state's supply of sodium thiopental.

9/29/10 - State officials called off the execution Wednesday after a ruling by the California Supreme Court. The execution will now be delayed until at least next year.

In May, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] decided not to file charges [JURIST report] against Cassano, ending a two-year criminal investigation of several executives from AIG's Financial Products subsidiary, which played a large role in constructing complex contracts known as credit-default swaps [TIME backgrounder] that insured bond losses tied to the US housing market. The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website] investigation was undertaken to determine whether AIG officials deceived investors and auditors in 2007 by misrepresenting the accounting value of a credit default swap portfolio, which nearly bankrupted the company. In 2009, former AIG executives agreed to settle [JURIST report] a suit [complaint, PDF] brought by the SEC alleging their involvement in inflating the company's reported financial records.

The 2006 coup plot [JURIST report] involved five members of the Philippines House of Representatives [official website], soldiers, a communist rebel leader and Philippines Senator Gregorio Honasan [official profile], who participated in other coup attempts during the 1990s. Charges against the five lawmakers were dismissed [JURIST report] in May 2006. There have been multiple other coup attempts [JURIST news archive] in the Philippines in the last decade. In 2007, more than 30 military officers and supporters were formally charged with rebellion [JURIST report] when about a dozen officers on trial in the Philippines in connection with a failed 2003 mutiny [BBC report] walked out of court, took control of a Manila hotel and demanded Arroyo's resignation. Philippine military and police forces subsequently regained control of the hotel after a lengthy confrontation. In addition to the aborted 2007 coup, 54 military officers were sentenced [JURIST report] to seven years and six months in prison for their participation in the 2003 coup attempt. No shots were fired during the 2003 incident, in which 31 officers commandeered a Manila hotel, threatened to set off explosives, and held off police for 19 hours before surrendering.