There have been numerous allegations of war crimes and human rights violations over the Libyan revolt. In July, lawyers filed a civil suit against NATO [JURIST report] for killing 13 civilians in an airstrike bombing of a residential neighborhood in violation of the Geneva Convention [ICRC materials]. Earlier that month, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website], after an investigative panel, published a 92-page report on human righsts abuses in Libya, decided to extend its mandate [JURIST reports], instructing it to continue investigating allegations. The report claims Libyan authorities have committed varying crimes against humanity "as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population with knowledge of the attack."

With the US withdrawing troops, ongoing disputes over irregularities in last September's parliamentary elections have raised doubts about the stability of the Afghan government. In January, Karzai postponed the seating [JURIST report] of Parliament following a request by the special court for more time to look into allegations of fraud surrounding the elections. Karzai had promised [JURIST report] to have the special court review the election results in time to seat the election by the original January deadline. But the IEC claimed that the special did not have legal authority to question the results that it certifies because the law says it has the final say in determining the elections results. In November, the Afghanistan Electoral Complaints Commission (ECC) [official website] disqualified 21 candidates [JURST report] for electoral fraud after finding widespread voting irregularities in 12 provinces. Of the disqualified candidates, 19 had either won or were leading in their districts, seven of which were incumbents, and two were second place finishers in districts where the first place finisher was also disqualified. In October, the IEC invalidated 1.3 million votes [JURIST report], nearly a quarter of the 5.6 million votes cast nationwide, due to findings of fraud. The IEC found that the 2,543 polling stations where the votes had been cast did not follow IEC procedures.

Australia should compensate Mr. Hicks for the violation of his ... rights, and in particular for seven months of unlawful, arbitrary detention in Australia and for the restrictions imposed upon his liberty and freedom by the imposition of a control order.... Australia should provide an assurance to Mr. Hicks that its law enforcement authorities will not seek to confiscate any literary proceeds which Mr. Hicks may derive from publishing or otherwise communicating for profit the story of this trial, conviction and related conduct.

Australian authorities removed the final restrictions against Hicks [JURIST report] in December 2008. Following his guilty plea, Hicks was transferred to Australia in May 2007 to serve the remainder of his nine-month prison sentence at a maximum security prison near his hometown of Adelaide, South Australia, and was released [JURIST reports] in December 2007. The control order was relaxed [JURIST report] in February 2008, permitting Hicks to live anywhere in the country, and requiring him to check in with police only twice a week.

The law has been challenged in federal courts in Colorado and California. The appeal to the Supreme Court comes in the case of US v. Alvarez [materials], in which the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] declared the law unconstitutional [JURIST report] last August. Although the panel conceded that Congress's intentions were "praiseworthy," it found that the law required courts to "extend inapposite case law to create an unprecedented exception to First Amendment guarantees" and was "not narrowly drawn" enough to survive First Amendment scrutiny. Alvarez was arrested after he gave a speech before the Three Valley Water District board of directors in California, to which he had recently been admitted, in which he claimed to be a retired marine and the recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor. In Colorado, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit [official website] awaits arguments in the case of US v. Strandlof [ACLU materials]. Rick Strandlof was arrested in 2009 after he founded a veterans' club in Colorado Springs and claimed to have been awarded the purple heart.