The EU has played an active role in environmental issues. Last month, the ECJ ruled [JURIST report] that France's ban on the cultivation of a genetically modified (GM) maize was illegal. Although France has the right to impose a ban on GM maize, the court stated that France acted illegally by not following proper EU protocol [Reuters report]. In order to impose a ban, EU members must demonstrate that the product poses a serious risk to the environment or human or animal health, and notify the European Commission [official website] authorities of the need to take emergency measures. In March, ECJ Advocate General Paolo Mengozzi issued an opinion [JURIST report] stating that a French ban on cultivating genetically modified (GM) crops was illegal. The use of GM organisms, whether through experimentation or cultivation, is governed by EU law.

The problem can only be solved through application of special means as well as requesting political leadership to eliminate militancy from their wings. The political face of the city has been taken hostage by militant groups of political parties. Political parties are penetrated by the criminals under the garb of political groups who use party flags. The militants and criminals are taking refuge in the lap of political and ethnic parties which use the flags of these parties to commit illegal activities with impunity.

Pakistan faces an ongoing struggle dealing with politicians allegedly involved with violent crime. Pakistani Judge Shahid Raffique in August ordered that the property of former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf be seized and his bank account frozen [JURIST report] in connection with his alleged involvement in the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto [JURIST news archives]. The judge ordered the nation's Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) [official website] to conduct the seizure because Musharraf had failed to respond to multiple subpoenas [Al Jazeera report]. Musharraf was arrested in February [JURIST report] because he had not cooperated during the investigation of Bhutto's death, and investigators alleged that Musharraf did not provide adequate security [DAWN report] for Bhutto when she was assassinated during a campaign rally in Pakistan in 2007.

Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa [official profile] announced in August that he will dismiss charges against some of the protesters [JURIST report] detained for their participation in pro-democracy demonstrations in the country. In June, Khalifa announced that an independent commission will investigate human rights violations [JURIST report] related to the country's pro-democracy protests. Earlier that month, the OHCHR announced that Bahrain agreed to permit a UN commission [JURIST report] to investigate human rights violations related to protests. The National Safety Courts were instituted in mid-March under Khalifa's three-month state of emergency [JURIST report] and have been internationally criticized, most recently [JURIST report] by Human Rights Watch (HRW). The court sentenced nine citizens [JURIST report] to 20 years in prison for kidnapping a police officer in May. In April, the court handed the death sentence to four protesters, a rarity in Bahrain, and upheld the sentences [JURIST reports] for two of the men who were accused of murdering police officers. All of the charges levied in the National Safety Court have been disputed by Bahraini citizens and international rights organizations.

Throughout his life, Bell repeatedly took public stands against what he perceived as racism. In 1959, he resigned his position with the Justice Department rather than give up his membership in the NAACP. In the 1980s, he resigned as Dean of the University of Oregon School of Law [official website] when he believed that minority candidates were not being properly considered for the faculty. After returning to Harvard Law School, Bell engaged in a public battle regarding the school's hiring practices and lack of diversity, ultimately leading him to take an unpaid leave of absence in 1990, followed by the school formally removing him in 1992. Bell continued to work as a scholar and visiting professor at New York University School of Law [official website, faculty profile] until his death. In 2003, Bell contributed an essay to an early JURIST online symposium on the Gratz and Grutter affirmative actions cases then recently decided in the US Supreme Court.

For the reasons set forth in the court's Memorandum Opinion, the court finds that plaintiffs have not shown that they are "likely to prevail" nor that they have a "substantial case" on the merits. The court carefully and thoroughly reviewed all issues raised by the parties and its lengthy Memorandum Opinion represents the product of its time and effort. It does not foresee a "substantial" case for reversal. ... The court has found that plaintiffs are not likely to be able to show that Sections 10, 12, 27, 28, and 30 [of the law] are due to be enjoined. Alabama has an interest in enforcing laws properly enacted by its Legislature and not likely to be found unconstitutional.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website], joined by several rights groups, appeared before the court last month [JURIST report] to make arguments against the law's enactment, at which point Blackburn issued the temporary injunction to forestall enactment of the challenged provisions while she evaluated their contention with federal statute. Religious groups and representatives of several rights groups including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the National Immigration Law Center (NILC), the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) [advocacy websites] have stated that the Alabama law is the most extreme of the recent state anti-immigration laws influenced by controversial Arizona SB 1070 [JURIST news archive]. Alabama lawmakers have defended the legislation, which was signed into law [JURIST reports] in June. Since that time, 16 countries filed briefs [JURIST report] in the Alabama district court against the controversial law, arguing that it provides unfair treatment to citizens of those countries currently residing in Alabama and sanctions discriminatory treatment based on ethnicity.

The ICC granted the request [JURIST report] of Chief Prosecutor Luis-Moreno Ocampo to open an investigation into the Ivory Coast's post-election violence earlier this week. Ocampo officially requested permission [JURIST report] from ICC judges in June to begin the investigation after determining that war crimes and crimes against humanity have been committed. The Ivory Coast announced earlier in that month that it would establish its own commission [JURIST report] to investigate alleged crimes committed as a result of the disputed presidential elections. This investigation may take up to two years [Reuters report]. Also, an official for the UN's International Commission of Inquiry called for an investigation [JURIST report] into Ouattara and his forces' continuing attacks against supporters of Gbagbo. In April, HRW urged Ouattara to conduct an investigation [JURIST report] into alleged atrocities carried out by his forces in its attempts to secure the presidency. According to the report, the pro-Ouattara forces, known as the Republican Forces of the Ivory Coast, killed more than 100 civilians, raped at least 20 supporters of Gbagbo and burned at least 10 villages in March. Also in April, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) [official website] reported the deaths of at least 800 civilians [JURIST report] in the Ivory Coast town of Duekoue as a result of intercommunal violence.

In Golan v. Holder [transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court heard arguments to determine the copyright status of foreign works that used to be in the public domain. Specifically, the issue for the court to consider is whether section 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 (URAA) [text], which restored copyright protection to thousands of foreign works previously in the public domain, violates the Progress Clause and First Amendment [text] of the US Constitution. The US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit [official website] held that section 514 did not violate the constitutional principles. Counsel for the government argued that the URAA was necessary in order to align the country with international intellectual property rules, stating that the Act was "of vital importance to protecting one of our most valuable economic exports, intellectual property." Counsel for the petitioners, which included orchestra conductors, educators, performers, film archivists and motion picture distributors, argued that the URAA imposed a "remarkable" burden on speech.

There can't be any doubt ... that performance has a huge amount of original expression bound up in it. It's the reason it's different to see King Lear at the Royal Shakespeare Company; it's the reason it's different when John Coltrane plays a jazz standard. [There is a] huge amount of expression.