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 Friday, April 1, 2011




UN rights office urges restraint, caution in Ivory Coast
John Paul Putney on April 1, 2011 2:57 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] on Friday urged all parties to show restraint [press release] in the Ivory Coast [JURIST news archive]. OHCHR spokesperson Rupert Colville acknowledged [press briefing] that OHCHR had received unconfirmed reports that the Ivory Coast Republican Forces had "engaged in looting and extortion, as well as serious human rights violations such as abductions, arbitrary arrests and ill-treatment of civilians" during their advance towards the capital Abidjan. In addition, reports from inside Abidjan indicated the pro-Ouattara Invisible Commando group continued to commit abuses [Reuters report]. The OHCHR cautioned both sides, indicating that the International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] as well as the recently established Commission of Inquiry for Cote d'Ivoire were already present and would investigate abuses by all sides [AFP report]. Ouattara reopened the airspace on Friday after Republican Forces took control of the state broadcaster [Bloomberg report] and seized Gbagbo's house in the Cocody neighborhood of Abidjan. Gbagbo's whereabouts are unknown.

Gbagbo has refused to cede power to president-elect Ouattara, who won the November 28 runoff election according to international observers. Last week, the OHCHR announced [press release] that the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website] will send an independent international commission to investigate [JURIST report] allegations of serious human rights abuses during post-election violence in the Ivory Coast. Last month, the OHCHR called for an independent investigation [JURIST report] into post-election violence as part of a report to the UNHRC. In January, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon [official website] rejected the proposed recount [JURIST report] of November's Ivory Coast presidential runoff election results as a "grave injustice and unfortunate precedent." Also in January, UN officials expressed "grave concerns" [JURIST report] on continued post-election violence in the Ivory Coast, cautioning that genocide could be imminent. In December, UN officials urged all parties to the disputed presidential election in the Ivory Coast to honor the country's commitment to prevent genocide [JURIST report], crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing under the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document [text, PDF]. Also in December, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) [official website] urged Gbagbo to step down, threatening the use of force [JURIST report] if he attempts to maintain power.




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


Iowa House passes ban on late-term abortions
Alexandra Malatesta on April 1, 2011 2:23 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Iowa House of Representatives [official website] on Thursday passed a bill [text] that would prohibit doctors from performing late-term abortions [JURIST news archive] in the state. The bill, which was prompted by Nebraska's decision to ban abortions performed after 20 weeks of gestation [JURIST report], was passed by the Republican-held body to preemptively prohibit a Nebraska doctor from performing the procedure [AP report] in Iowa. The doctor indicated after the procedure was banned in Nebraska that he would open a clinic in Iowa near the Nebraska border in order to continue offering the procedure to women. Democratic critics of the bill likened it to using a sledge hammer to kill a fly [statement]. The bill, which does not include an exception for rape or incest, requires that late term pregnancy complications meet a threshold of "immediate danger" to garner exception from the ban. The legislation is justified as a way to protect women's health stating, "Abortion has a higher medical risk when the procedure is performed later in the pregnancy. Compared to an abortion at eight weeks gestation or earlier, the relative risk increases exponentially at higher gestations. The incidence of major complications is highest after twenty weeks of gestation." Friday's bill follows Iowa's third anti-abortion bill which passed on Wednesday, and calls for strict regulations of clinics and doctor's offices where abortions are provided. The legislation must now be approved by the state's Senate where it is unclear whether the measure has enough support for approval.

Several state legislatures have recently passed restrictions on abortions [JURIST report]. Last week, South Dakota Governor Dennis Daugaard [official website] signed [JURIST report] HB 1217 into law, requiring women to seek counseling at a pregnancy center and wait three days before obtaining an abortion. Also in March, the Missouri House of Representatives [official website] voted in favor of legislation restricting late-term abortions [JURIST report] and imposing penalties on doctors who fail to comply with the new restrictions. The legislation, which is slated to become effective at the end of August, bans abortions of "viable" fetuses. The Oklahoma House of Representatives [official website] voted in March to approve a bill that would ban abortion after 20 weeks of gestation [JURIST report]. In February, the Kansas House of Representatives [official website] also approved several new restrictions on abortion [JURIST report].




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


Mexico attorney general resigns amid criticism
Michael Haggerson on April 1, 2011 1:51 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Mexican Attorney General Arturo Chavez [official website, in Spanish], announced Friday that he is resigning his position [text, in Spanish] for urgent personal reasons. Chavez, appointed [JURIST report] just 18 months ago, resigned amid criticism over how he handled the position. Three weeks ago, a US diplomatic cable released through WikiLeaks [website] described Chavez's appointment as "totally unexpected and politically inexplicable" [text]. The leaked cable continued:
Chavez has strong detractors within the Mexican human rights community because of his perceived failings in dealing with the murder of a large number of women in Ciudad Juarez, at a time when he was ratcheting up the fight against drug cartels. The killings gained international attention and leading human rights organizations at home and abroad charged Chavez with failing to energetically pursue the cases and even claimed that he had covered up evidence.
Chavez's popularity was also affected by his failure to convict any of the public officials arrested [JURIST report] for their connection to the La Familia drug cartel [NPR backgrounder]. President Felipe Calderon [official website, in Spanish] nominated Marisela Morales [LAT report] to replace Chavez. Morales will be the first woman to serve as Mexico's attorney general.

Mexico has struggled to combat the drug cartels' influence on the government and the country as a whole. There have been more than 27,000 drug-related deaths since 2006 [STRATFOR report], and the violence has steadily escalated over the last few years. In April 2009, Mexico's Senate passed a constitutional amendment [JURIST report] permitting the seizure of suspected drug traffickers' property prior to their conviction. In 2008, a former Assistant Attorney General was arrested for receiving bribes, and Mexico's prosecutor's office admitted that it had been infiltrated [JURIST reports] by the drug cartels.




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


Federal judge dismisses health care challenge
Drew Singer on April 1, 2011 1:42 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the District of New Hampshire [official website] on Wednesday dismissed a lawsuit [text, PDF] that challenged the constitutionality of the new health care law [JURIST news archive]. District Court Judge Joseph Laplante held that the plaintiff, 80-year-old Harold Peterson, lacked standing [AP report] because his Medicare coverage automatically satisfied the law's insurance mandate. The complaint alleged that the law [HR 3590 text] violates a list of Constitutional clauses, including the Commerce Clause [Cornell LII backgrounder] and the Fifth Amendment [text] for taking one's privacy without due process or just compensation.

On Thursday, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website] denied [order, PDF; JURIST report] the petition for initial hearing en banc in the health care reform law appeal, but confirmed that the appeal will nonetheless be expedited. Oral arguments are currently scheduled for June 8 before a randomly-selected three-judge panel. Last month, Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli filed a petition for a writ of certiorari [JURIST report] with the US Supreme Court [JURIST news archive] asking the court to rule on the constitutionality of the law on an expedited basis, before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rules on the issue, but the Obama administration opposes the petition [JURIST report]




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


Quebec court rules national securites regulator unconstitutional
Dan Taglioli on April 1, 2011 1:36 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Quebec Court of Appeal [officials website], Quebec's highest court, ruled [judgment, in French] Thursday that the creation of a national securities adviser, as set forth in the proposed Canadian Securities Act [text; official backgrounder], would be unconstitutional. The legislation would establish the Canadian Securities Regulatory Authority (CSRA) [fact sheet], consolidating the current "passport" system, which allows province and territory authorities to issue registration recognized nationwide, under a single national authority run by a board of directors accountable to the Ministry of Finance [official website], with voluntary provincial participation. The court's ruling echoes a similar decision handed down by the Alberta Court of Appeal [official website] in March, which stated that under the Constitution Act, 1867 [text], the federal government does not have the constitutional authority to regulate the securities industry. The legislation was submitted to the Supreme Court of Canada [official website] for an ultimate ruling on the proposal's constitutionality [official backgrounder], and the top court is scheduled to hear the case this month.

Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty [official website] proposed the legislation [JURIST report] in May. The legislation is based on the recommendations of a seven-member panel appointed by Flaherty, which concluded last January that the global financial crisis [FT backgrounder] increased the need for a national securities regulatory system. It comes as a culmination of the efforts of successive Canadian governments to form a single securities regulator. To date, six provinces and territories have applied for status to oppose the federal legislation before the Supreme Court, leaving Ontario as the only province that will support the legislation.




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


Argentina ex-general sentenced to life for 'Dirty War' crimes
LaToya Sawyer on April 1, 2011 1:02 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] An Argentine federal court on Thursday sentenced former general Eduardo Cabanillas to life in prison for his involvement in the nation's 1976-83 "Dirty War" [GlobalSecurity backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. Cabanillas, who ran a secret Buenos Aires facility known as Automotores Orletti, was convicted of murder [RTT report], torture and illegal imprisonment of its detainees. The detentions were part of "Operation Condor" [BBC backgrounder], a campaign by the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay to round up left-wing dissidents. The court also sentenced several ex-officials who went on trial [JURIST report] with Cabanillas in June for their involvement in the crimes. Two former intelligence agents, Honorio Martinez and Eduardo Ruffo, each received 25-year prison terms, and former military intelligence officer Raul Guglielminetti received a 20-year sentence. It is estimated that between 20,000 and 30,000 people were forcibly kidnapped or "disappeared" during the government's campaign against suspected dissidents during the country's Dirty War.

Argentina continues to prosecute those accused of committing human rights abuses during the Dirty War. Last month, former general Luciano Benjamin Menendez, already serving a life sentence, was sentenced to an additional life sentence [JURIST report] for the attack and murder of five urban guerrilla group members. Also in March, an Argentine court commenced the trial of former dictators Jorge Videla [Trial Watch profile; JURIST news archive] and Reynaldo Bignone [JURIST news archive] for allegedly overseeing a systematic plan to steal babies [JURIST report] born to political prisoners. In December, Videla was sentenced to life in prison [JURIST report] for crimes against humanity. Videla's trial commenced in July after he was charged with an additional 49 counts [JURIST reports] of murder, kidnapping and torture in May following the identification of 40 bodies in Buenos Aires in 2009. Also in May, Argentine authorities arrested [JURIST report] former secret service agent Miguel Angel Furci on charges of human rights abuses. Furci, a former agent of the Secretariat of State Intelligence (SIDE), was charged with 70 kidnappings and the torture of detainees at Orletti.




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


South Korea Constitutional Court upholds law criminalizing homosexuality in military
Brian Jackson on April 1, 2011 10:25 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The South Korean Constitutional Court [official website, in Korean] on Thursday upheld a law allowing the government to bring criminal charges against any member of the military who has sex with another individual of the same gender. The law, which allows for prosecution even in the absence of a complaining witness [Korea Herald report], has been part of the Korean military criminal code since 1962. Despite the controversy surrounding the law, relatively few individuals have been prosecuted. Between 2004 and 2007, 176 individuals faced charges, with three cases resulting in prison sentences. The court upheld the law in a 5-4 ruling [AFP report], citing a need to maintain discipline in the armed forces. Under the civil code of Korea, homosexuality is not illegal.

In October, the National Human Rights Commission of South Korea [official website, in Korean] issued a report stating that it found the law unconstitutional [JURIST report], and calling for the law to be repealed. In the US, until recently, open homosexuality has been an exclusionary factor for service in the armed forces. In December, the Senate voted to repeal [JURIST report] the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy implemented during the Clinton administration. The House of Representatives had passed a bill repealing the law [JURIST report] earlier the same week.




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


ICJ dismisses case on Georgia-Russia conflict
Andrea Bottorff on April 1, 2011 10:12 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The International Court of Justice (ICJ) [official website; JURIST news archive] on Friday ruled [judgment, PDF] 10-6 that it lacks jurisdiction in a case to determine whether Russia committed human rights abuses following the secession of two areas of Georgia [JURIST news archive] in the 1990s. The ICJ began hearings [JURIST report] on the case after Russia challenged the court's jurisdiction to hear the controversy in late 2009, arguing that the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) [materials] is inapplicable as Georgia and Russia were not engaged in a dispute over ethnic discrimination prior to the filing of the allegations. The ICJ dismissed Russia's objection, holding that there was a dispute between the nations, but the court found that the parties had not completed possible negotiations, a procedural requirement that must be fulfilled before parties may bring their dispute to the ICJ:
The Court concludes that the facts in the record show that, between 9 August and 12 August 2008, Georgia did not attempt to negotiate CERD-related matters with the Russian Federation, and that, consequently, Georgia and the Russian Federation did not engage in negotiations with respect to the latter's compliance with its substantive obligations under CERD.
According to a member of the Russian Foreign Ministry, the Russian government supports the ICJ decision [Civil Georgia report]. However, Georgia's Deputy Minister of Justice Tina Burjaliani emphasized that "the court has left open the possibility that the case can proceed once the formal conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction ... have been met," suggesting that Georgian officials will continue to pursue the case [press release].

The dispute between Russian and Georgia is not limited to the proceedings before the ICJ. Last year, representatives from Russia met with prosecutors [JURIST report] from the International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] to discuss claims of war crimes allegedly committed by Georgian soldiers during the conflict in South Ossetia in August 2008. That conflict occurred when Russia sent its military into Georgia in response to a Georgian bid to strike South Ossetia, an area heavily populated by Russians. The US has taken the position that both nations committed human rights violations [JURIST report] during that conflict. Georgia initially brought the case [JURIST report] before the ICJ in August 2008, shortly after Russia sent troops into Georgia.




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


Eleventh Circuit declines full panel hearing of health care appeal
John Paul Putney on April 1, 2011 8:41 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website] on Thursday denied [order, PDF] the petition for initial hearing en banc [Cornell LII backgrounder] in the health care reform law [HR 3590 materials; JURIST news archive] appeal. The two-page order does not reveal the results of the vote other than indicating a majority voted against it. The order confirms that the appeal will nonetheless be expedited. Oral arguments are currently scheduled for June 8 before a randomly-selected three-judge panel. The identities of the panel members will not be disclosed until at least 14 days before the arguments.

Earlier this month, the Obama administration filed a brief [PDF] with the court contesting the plaintiff states' request [JURIST report] to have the appeal heard by an en banc court. Also this month, the Eleventh Circuit granted [JURIST report] the Obama administration's motion for an expedited appeal. Last month, Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli filed a petition for a writ of certiorari [JURIST report] with the US Supreme Court [JURIST news archive] asking the court to rule on the constitutionality of the law on an expedited basis, before the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rules on the issue, but the Obama administration opposes the petition [JURIST report]. In January, a judge for the US District Court for the Western District of Virginia dismissed a lawsuit [JURIST report] challenging a provision of the health care reform law. In October, a federal judge in Michigan ruled that the law is constitutional [JURIST report] under the Commerce Clause as it addresses the economic effects of health care decisions, and that it does not represent an unconstitutional direct tax.




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


Indiana Senate approves constitutional ban on same-sex marriage
John Paul Putney on April 1, 2011 7:50 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Indiana Senate [official website] overwhelmingly approved [action list] on Tuesday an amendment [text] to the State Constitution [text] that would ban same-sex marriage [JURIST news archive] or any "substantially similar" status. The measure passed 40-10 after receiving a similarly lop-sided victory [JURIST report] in the House of Representatives [official website] last month. The amendment would reaffirm Indiana's 25-year-old statutory ban on gay marriage [WIBC report]. Opponents of the amendment expressed concern that it will make Indiana appear unwelcoming and deter talented workers [South Bend Tribune report] from coming to the state. Proponents insist the amendment is necessary because the judiciary can easily repeal a statute [The Exponent report]. The amendment would have to be approved again in a newly-elected House and Senate before being submitted to voters in 2014 at the earliest.

The issue of same-sex marriage continues to be hotly debated in the US. Last month, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] announced that it would no longer defend the constitutionality [JURIST report] of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) [text; JURIST news archive], which defines marriage for federal purposes as a legal union between one man and one woman, in court cases challenging the provision. Also in February, Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie signed a same-sex civil unions bill into law, while the Wyoming Senate approved a bill that would prevent the state from recognizing same-sex marriages [JURIST reports] and civil unions performed in other jurisdictions. Same-sex marriage is currently legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire and Washington, DC [JURIST reports].




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