The government's case, even in Counts 8 and 9, was always primarily focused on the pay-to-play scheme between Scrushy and Siegelman. The vast majority of the allegations and testimony went to prove this scheme. The government always described the scheme alleged in Counts 8 and 9 as selfdealing, and its attempt now—post-Skilling—to emphasize the alleged bribery of Adams finds some, but not much, support in the proof. The evidence that Adams intended to alter his official actions as a result of the receipt of benefits from Scrushy is insufficient, and Scrushy's convictions on Counts 8 and 9 must be reversed.

Last June, the Supreme Court vacated the 2006 judgments [JURIST report] against Siegelman and Scrushy. Their cases were remanded to the Eleventh Circuit for proceedings consistent with the court's ruling in Skilling v. United States [opinion, PDF; JURIST report]. Siegelman and Scrushy were convicted in 2006 [JURIST report] on federal bribery and corruption charges. The convictions were appealed, and Siegelman had two counts of mail fraud reversed for lack of evidence. The court of appeals later denied a request [JURIST report] by Siegelman and Scrushy for an en banc rehearing of their convictions on charges of corruption.

Six of the opposition leaders were arrested [JURIST report] in March after the government, backed by foreign troops from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) [official website], violently dispersed protesters in the capital of Manana. Many protesters are calling for the removal of the royal family, which has been in power since the 18th century. Last week, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] urged the government of Bahrain to release detained activists [JURIST report] and exercise restraint against protesters. She expressed concern over the prosecution of medical professionals and the death sentences [JURIST report] handed to four activists last month. In April, human rights organizations including HRW and Doctors Without Borders (DWB) [advocacy website] criticized Bahrain [JURIST report] for rampant human rights abuses related to anti-government protests. This week Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa [official website] announced [JURIST report] that the three-month state of emergency [decree text, in Arabic] put in place [JURIST report] in mid-March in response to growing unrest, will be lifted two weeks early.

Although lower courts have given death sentences in honor killing cases, the Supreme Court had yet to weigh in on death penalties for honor killings. In April, the Supreme Court urged an end to honor killings [JURIST report] and called the custom wholly illegal. Last June, the Supreme Court ordered the central government and seven state governments to explain the steps they have taken to reduce honor killings [JURIST report]. The order came in response to a petition filed by Shakti Vahini [advocacy website], a non-governmental human rights organization seeking the implementation of stricter laws against the perpetrators of honor killings.

Syria has struggled violently to end anti-government protests which began earlier this year. At the end of April the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website], in an emergency special session, publicly condemned the violence [JURIST report] used by Syrian authorities against peaceful protesters. Also last month UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] called for Syria to immediately halt the killings [JURIST report] and violence against civilian protesters in response to the fatal shootings of peaceful anti-government protesters. Assad has recently ended the 48-year-old state of emergency [JURIST report], an event of significant historical note, but protests have continued.

The convictions were the first related to the Bhopal disaster in which nearly 3,800 people were killed when toxic gas was accidentally released in the middle of the night by a chemical plant owned by a Union Carbide subsidiary company. Upwards of 15,000 others later died from exposure to the gas, and 50,000 were left permanently disabled. In November, the Indian government announced that it had authorized additional compensation [JURIST report] for the victims of the chemical spill. The new package includes USD $15.8 million, adding to the original disbursement in June of USD $148 million. In July, the Indian government apologized for improperly dumping waste [JURIST report] related to the Bhopal incident.

The message today is clear—there are rules and there are laws, and they apply to everyone, no matter who you are or how much money you have. Unlawful insider trading should be offensive to everyone who believes in, and relies on, the market. It cheats the ordinary investor, victimizes the companies whose information is stolen, and is an affront not only to the fairness of the market, but the rule of law. In just over 18 months, this office has charged 47 individuals with insider trading crimes; Rajaratnam is the 35th person to be convicted. We will continue to pursue and prosecute those who believe they are both above the law and too smart to get caught.

Several other defendants have pleaded guilty in connection with the case. Danielle Chiesi pleaded guilty [JURIST report] in January. Former IBM [corporate website] senior vice president Robert Moffat was sentenced to six months in prison in September and ordered him to pay a $50,000 fine for his role in the scheme after pleading guilty [JURIST reports] in March 2010. Former Intel Capital [corporate website] executive Rajiv Goel pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to insider trading charges in February 2010. Rajaratnam, Chiesi, Goel and Moffat were arrested in October 2009 and charged [complaint, PDF] along with two other individuals and two business entities with insider trading. The complaint alleged that the individuals provided Galleon Group and another hedge fund with material nonpublic information about several corporations upon which the funds traded, generating $25 million in illicit gain. Rajaratnam and Chiesi originally pleaded not guilty [JURIST report] in December 2009 after being indicted for insider trading.

Several other state legislatures have also acted recently to implement so-called "Arizona style" immigration laws. Last month, the Indiana House of Representatives [official website] approved legislation [JURIST report] to revoke tax credits from businesses that hire illegal immigrants and require the use of the E-verify System [official website] to check the eligibility status of employees. Also in April, the Georgia General Assembly [official website] approved a bill requiring police to check the immigration status of anyone they have probable cause to believe has committed a criminal offense and requiring businesses to use E-Verify to check the immigration status of potential employees. Similar legislation has also been approved in Alabama, Virginia and Oklahoma [JURIST reports]. Arizona's law is currently enjoined, and Governor Jan Brewer has pledged to appeal to the US Supreme Court [JURIST reports].

The wearing of traditional religious clothing in court rooms and other public places has been highly contested in the US and around the world. In March, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to review a lower court order requiring a Muslim woman to remove her niqab [JURIST report] while testifying. The Court of Appeal for Ontario ruled [JURIST report] that a witness does not have to remove her veil unless the failure to do so will prevent the accused from receiving a fair trial, and should be determined on a case-by-case basis. In December, the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia (ACLUGA) [advocacy website] filed a lawsuit on behalf of a Muslim woman [JURIST report] who was arrested for refusing to remove her headscarf in court. In October, the French Constitutional Council ruled [JURIST report] that a bill making it illegal to wear the Islamic burqa, niqab or other full face veils in public, conforms with the Constitution. Earlier that month, a Dutch politician suggested that the Netherlands will ban the burqa [JURIST report] as part of the government's plan to form a minority coalition. Last May, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled [JURIST report] that a Muslim woman's religious rights were not violated by police officers when she was forced to remove her headscarf while being detained in a holding cell. In April 2010, a judge for the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan dismissed [JURIST report] a lawsuit against a Michigan judge who ordered a Muslim woman to remove her headscarf in court.

In November, voters in Niger have overwhelmingly approved a new constitution [JURIST report]. The Supreme Council for the Restoration of Democracy (CSRD) suspended the previous constitution [JURIST reports], which allowed Tandja to remain in office for three more years and to run in any subsequent elections. The constitution is Niger's seventh since independence from France in 1960. In September 2009, members of Nigerien opposition parties said that police had detained 30 former opposition lawmakers allegedly at the behest of Tandja. The 30 former members of parliament were arrested on charges of embezzlement [JURIST report], but were likely being targeted for their dissidence, as they refused to recognize Tandja's expansion of powers. In February of last year, Nigerien rights group, the United Front for the Safeguard of Democratic Assets (Fusad), pushed for the prosecution [JURIST report] of Tandja on treason charges and corruption violating the constitution shortly after the coup.