JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE ARCHIVEDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.
Listen to Paper Chase!


Legal news from Tuesday, February 8, 2011




Syria lifts ban on social media sites Facebook, YouTube
John Paul Putney on February 8, 2011 2:17 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Syrian Internet users reported on Tuesday that social media sites Facebook [website; JURIST news archive] and YouTube [website; JURIST news archive] are accessible without proxy servers or VPNs. Syria appears to be lifting the ban imposed in 2007 as a concession to avoid popular upheaval [DP report] in Syria. Because both Facebook and YouTube are routinely accessed by Syrians through international proxy servers, the concession may have limited impact [AP report]. The move follows a recent interview in which President Bashar Al-Assad indicated he would push for political reforms including municipal elections and a new media law [CP report]. Other websites, such as Amazon and Wikipedia, remain blocked for the time being.

Several countries have banned and unbanned popular media sites in recent years. In November, Turkish authorities lifted a nearly three-year ban [JURIST report] on YouTube after disputed videos that allegedly insulted Turkey's founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk [Turkish News profile], were removed from the site's content. In July, a Russian court made public a ruling banning access to five websites [JURIST report], including YouTube, for extremist elements. In June, a Pakistani court reimposed a ban on YouTube [JURIST report] after content deemed offensive to Muslims resurfaced on the website when a previous ban was lifted last month. In May, the Pakistan Telecommunications Authority [official website] ordered Internet service providers to block Facebook [JURIST report] in response to a competition created by a group of the website's members entitled "Draw Muhammad Day."




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


Hungary agrees to change controversial media law
Sarah Posner on February 8, 2011 1:19 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Hungary agreed Monday to change its controversial media law [text, PDF] following negotiations between Hungarian and EU representatives. The new law, which controls private television and radio broadcasters, newspapers, and online news sites, has been criticized as being too restrictive of freedom of expression. Last month, European Commission Vice President Neelie Kroes challenged the legality of the act [statement, text] under EU law, specifically provisions that apply to media originating in countries other than Hungary, regulate media beyond simple broadcasting and require media outlets to register with a new authority. Hungary's Communication Minister Zoltan Kovacs said that officials will address the problems noted by the European Commission and change the text to make the media law more clear and precise. The Hungarian government plans to revise the text and submit changes [DW report] to the law on Thursday.

Hungary's parliament passed the new media law last December amid protests and criticism. The law took effect on January 1, 2011, the same day the Hungarian government assumed the presidency of the EU. Despite criticism, the Hungarian government initially defended [JURIST report] the law, which created the National Media and Communications Authority (NMHH) [official website, in Hungarian]. Under the new law, the NMHH can fine broadcasters more than 700,000 euros and newspapers and news websites roughly 90,000 euros if their coverage is deemed unbalanced or immoral by the media authority, whose members are all loyal to the ruling Fidesz party [party website, in Hungarian]. The law has been harshly criticized [Daily Mail report] by members of the media, as well as other European governments, as being too restrictive of free expression.




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


Iraq government torturing detainees in secret prisons: Amnesty
Maureen Cosgrove on February 8, 2011 1:11 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Iraqi government is operating secret prisons, and suspects held in Iraqi custody have been systematically tortured since before the 2003 US invasion, according to a Tuesday report [text, PDF] from Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website]. The report, "Broken Bodies, Tortured Minds: Abuse and Neglect of Detainees in Iraq," alleges that Iraqi and US forces have detained tens of thousands of people without trials, access to lawyers or opportunity to challenge the legality of their detention. The Central Criminal Court of Iraq (CCCI) [JURIST news archive], according to the report, regularly convicts defendants based on confessions extracted with the use of torture and ill-treatment. AI claims that, upon release, prisoners often leave the detention centers with serious physiological and psychological injury:
After US forces handed over tens of thousands of prisoners to Iraqi custody between early 2009 and July 2010 without any guarantees that they will be protected, there is every likelihood that torture and ill-treatment will remain widespread. Such abuses have a devastating impact on the victims not just when they are being tortured or ill-treated, but often for years afterwards or even for the rest of their lives. Urgent action is needed to end the pattern of abuse and to help the victims and their families.
Overcrowding and lack of medical treatment also contribute to the poor conditions enumerated in the report. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki [official website, in Arabic] denied similar claims [AFP report] made by Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] earlier this week.

Numerous human rights groups have responded to reports of detainee torture in Iraq. In September, AI published a report [text, PDF] alleging that the Iraqi government is unlawfully detaining and torturing [press release; JURIST report] thousands of detainees. In June, UN Special Representative to Iraq Ad Melkert urged the Iraqi government [JURIST report] to ratify the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment [text]. Melkert stated that Iraq had made several advances in recognizing human rights violations, but the government's policy implementation still faces several obstacles. The convention was adopted by the UN in 1984 and has been ratified by 147 countries. Iraq remains one of 45 member-countries that have yet to ratify the treaty. In April, HRW reported on the repeated torture [JURIST report] of Iraqi detainees in a secret prison in Baghdad. HRW reported that detainees held at the secret Muthanna facility, run by Iraqi authorities, were hung upside-down, deprived of air, kicked, whipped, beaten, given electric shocks and sodomized during torture sessions that detainees faced every three to four days.




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


Pakistan investigators accuse Musharraf in Bhutto assassination
Ashley Hileman on February 8, 2011 12:48 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Federal Investigation Agency of Pakistan [official website] on Monday named former president Pervez Musharraf [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] as an accused in the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto [BBC obituary; JURIST news archive]. Musharraf's name was included on an interim criminal charge-sheet [BBC report] after investigations revealed that he appointed and allegedly gave orders to the police officers accused of failing to protect Bhutto on the day she was assassinated. Specifically, the prosecution document alleges that Musharraf ordered the officers to remove a security detail for Bhutto prior to her departure and that he later ordered the same officers to hose down the scene of the assassination. In December, a Pakistani Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) issued warrants [JURIST report] for the arrest of Syed Saud Aziz and Khurram Shahzad, the two accused of carrying out Musharraf's orders. Information gathered during questioning of these officers influenced the decision to include Musharraf's name on the charge-sheet, which does not act as a formal indictment.

In January, the governor of Pakistan's Punjab province, Salman Taseer, was assassinated [JURIST report] by one of his own security guards, apparently due to his opposition to Pakistan's blasphemy law [text; JURIST news archive]. Taseer, a senior member of the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) [official website], was shot while getting into his car at Islamabad's Kohsar Market and died later at a hospital. Interior Minister Rehman Malik said the guard immediately surrendered to police and confessed to shooting Taseer because he had spoken against the blasphemy law. This was the most high-profile assassination since that of Bhutto in 2007 and again involved issues of security. The Pakistani government and police forces have been criticized for their part in Bhutto's assassination. In April 2010, an independent UN commission formed to investigate the assassination, issued a report holding the Pakistani government and police forces responsible [JURIST report] for failing to provide adequate security. The report also accused the government of failing to launch a proper investigation into the assassination.




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


Closing arguments begin in trial of former Liberian president Taylor
Zach Zagger on February 8, 2011 11:56 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Closing arguments began Tuesday in the trial of former Liberian president Charles Taylor [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity, despite Taylor's absence from the courtroom. UN prosecutors said the trial will proceed [Telegraph report] despite Taylor and his lawyer, Courtenay Griffiths, leaving the courtroom at the beginning of the prosecution's closing arguments. Griffiths called the tribunal a "farce" [BBC report] after it refused to accept the defense's written brief because it was 20 days past the deadline. He addressed the court saying, "[o]ur very presence in court is incompatible with our duty to protect Mr. Taylor's interest. And it is our intention ... to leave court at this point." Griffiths argues that the court will not have the foundational information from his brief, but asserts that they are not withdrawing entirely from the court. They only want to wait for an appeals court to decide whether the court should accept the brief before reaching a verdict.

Taylor's charges [indictment, PDF], including murder, rape, sexual slavery and acts of terrorism, stem from from a "campaign to terrorize the civilian population" of Sierra Leone. Taylor's defense lawyers opened their case [JURIST report] in July 2009 and have claimed that he could not have commanded rebel forces in Sierra Leone while acting as the president of Liberia. His trial continued after the court denied his motion for acquittal [JURIST report] in May 2009. Prosecutors previously expressed concern that the defense's list of 256 witnesses could make the trial last up to four additional years [JURIST report].




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


Italy court orders release of former Guantanamo detainee
Matt Glenn on February 8, 2011 9:44 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A Milan court on Monday ordered Italian authorities to release former Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainee Abdel Ben Mabrouk [NYT materials], finding that the eight years Mabrouk served at Guantanamo and the year he spent in an Italian prison were sufficient punishment. The judge handed Mabrouk a two-year suspended sentence [AKI report] for terrorist association based on recommendations from Mabrouk's lawyer and prosecutor Armando Spataro. The fact that the Guantanamo Bay detention facility is illegal under Italian law played a role in the prosecution's agreement to seek a lenient sentence [CP report]. The US government transferred Mabrouk [JURIST report] from Guantanamo Bay to Italy in 2009 along with fellow Tunisian Mohamed Ben Riadh Nasri [NYT materials], whom an Italian court sentenced to six years in prison [JURIST report] last week, as part of the US government's attempt to shut down the detention center. It is unclear where Mabrouk will go after being released, especially given the political situation in his home country.

The continued operation of Guantanamo Bay remains controversial. Last month, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] criticized US President Barack Obama [JURIST report] for failing to shut down the facility. Obama's stated desire to close Guantanamo has faced heavy opposition in Congress. In early January, Obama signed a bill barring the transfer of Guantanamo detainees [JURIST report] to the US for trial. The legislation authorized funding for defense interests abroad, military construction and national security-related energy programs and barred the use of funds to transfer detainees into the US and limited funds available for transfers to foreign countries. The administration plans to seek the repeal of these restrictions and opposes the extension or expansion of them in the future. The number of detainees at Guantanamo has been significantly reduced as the administration continues to transfer detainees to a growing list of countries including Germany, Italy, Spain, Maldives, Georgia, Albania, Latvia, Switzerland, Slovakia, Somaliland, Palau, Belgium, Afghanistan and Bermuda [JURIST reports]. There are currently 178 detainees awaiting transfer from Guantanamo.




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


Bank of America settles excessive overdraft fee lawsuit
Aman Kakar on February 8, 2011 8:02 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Bank of America (BOA) [corporate website] has reached a $410 million settlement in a class action suit accusing the bank of excessive overdraft fees, according to documents submitted Friday in the US District Court Southern District of Florida [official website]. BOA is among more than two dozen US, Canadian and European lenders named as defendants in the class action lawsuit, which consolidated claims across the country in 2009. In their amended complaint [text, PDF], the plaintiffs claimed that BOA's practices were deceptive in that they did not reasonably notify customers that they had the option of opting out of the overdraft scheme and declining transactions. The complaint also alleged that BOA's excessive fees disproportionately effect low-income customers. A judge must now approve the settlement agreement.

BOA has recently been the target of several lawsuits. In January, plaintiffs filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] against Countrywide Financial Corporation [NYT backgrounder], a BOA subsidiary, in New York State Supreme Court [official website] alleging widespread fraud that resulted in substantial financial losses. Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard filed a lawsuit in mid-December against BOA for misleading customers [JURIST report] in mortgage modification and foreclosure practices. Earlier in the month, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website] reached a $137 million settlement agreement [JURIST report] with BOA over fraud charges [order, PDF] in a lawsuit that claimed BOA used anti-competitive bidding processes with 20 state municipalities. In June, BOA subsidiary Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. reached [JURIST report] a $108 million settlement agreement [text, PDF] with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) [official website] in response to a lawsuit that charged it with collecting excessive fees from homeowners facing foreclosure.




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

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


LATEST OP-ED

The War on Terror and the Need for Muslim Support
DOMESTIC
Faisal Kutty
Valparaiso University Law School

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

SYNDICATION

Add Paper Chase legal news to your RSS reader or personalized portal:
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Add to My AOL

E-MAIL

Subscribe to Paper Chase by e-mail. JURIST offers a free once-a-day digest [sample]. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.


R|mail e-mails individual Paper Chase posts through the day. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.

PUBLICATION

Join top US law schools, federal appeals courts, law firms and legal organizations by publishing Paper Chase legal news on your public website or intranet.

JURIST offers a news ticker and preformatted headline boxes updated in real time. Get the code.

Feedroll provides free Paper Chase news boxes with headlines or digests precisely tailored to your website's look and feel, with content updated every 15 minutes. Customize and get the code.

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org