In June, Croatian authorities charged Tomislav Mercep [JURIST report], another former military commander and interior minister, for war crimes committed during the conflict in the Balkans during the 1990s. The day before Mercep's arrest [JURIST report], Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] released a report [text, PDF] calling for the prosecution of individuals responsible for war crimes. Last November, six men were sentenced [JURIST report] to prison terms for their roles in the 2008 killing of a Croatian journalist. In 2008, AI called on the EU to use Croatia's status as a candidate country to ensure that the Croatian government actively investigates and prosecutes [JURIST report] suspected war criminals. AI criticized the slow pace of war crimes investigations, noting that the courts have mostly focused on crimes allegedly committed by ethnic Serbs even though Croats have also been accused. In March 2005, the EU suspended entry talks [JURIST report] on the grounds that Croatia was failing to fully cooperate with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ITCY) [official website; JURIST news archive] investigating war crimes in the area. The entry talks resumed in October 2005 after the ICTY declared Croatia was fully cooperating [JURIST report].

Practically, giving the Trustee the power to pursue the claims on behalf of creditors would usurp the creditors' right to determine whether and in what forum to vindicate their legal injuries and would raise difficult issues of preclusion. Moreover, were the Trustee empowered to pursue the claims of third party creditors, the debtor's assets would be depleted to enforce rights possessed by third parties and defendants would face the danger of duplicative recoveries.

The first payouts to Madoff's victims were approved [JURIST report] by the court in July. Picard filed almost 60 lawsuits [JURIST report] for victims of Madoff's fraud in December 2010, including the suits against JPMorgan Chase and HSBC. Judge Louis Stanton made Picard the trustee [order] of Bernard L. Madoff Securities, LLC in December 2008. Madoff was sentenced [JURIST report] in June 2009 to 150 years in prison for securities fraud stemming from his Ponzi scheme. He pleaded guilty [JURIST report] to 11 counts of securities fraud in March 2009.

This report comes as the Libya conflict [JURIST backgrounder] appears to be drawing to a close after the interim Libyan prime minister declared the country's liberation [JURIST report] following Gaddafi's death. There have been numerous efforts by Libyan and international courts to investigate various members of the Gaddafi regime. Earlier in the summer, the International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] had issued an arrest warrant [JURIST report] for Gaddafi for crimes against humanity, although some commentators suggested that Gaddafi should face trial in Libya [JURIST op-ed]. Last week, Gaddfi's son and former intelligent director were reportedly seeking to turn themselves in to the ICC [JURIST report], although they have yet to do so.

The country's upcoming election has resulted in a variety of legislative and court activity. Earlier this week, Egypt's Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) [NYT backgrounder] announced that they will soon ratify a law that bans anyone found guilty of corruption [JURIST report] from participating in politics. The law has been criticized for its potential for abuse [JURIST report]. Last month, an Egyptian court overturned a ban [JURIST report] that prohibited presidential hopeful Ayman Nour [BBC profile] from forming a political party and also prohibited the formation of the Islamic-based political party Al-Gama'a al-Islamiya [party website]. The decision will allow political parties previously banned because of their religious foundations to participate in the upcoming November parliamentary elections. The SCAF recently amended election rules to ban the use of religious slogans in campaigning [JURIST report], stating that "[e]lectoral campaigns based on the use of religious slogans or on racial or gender segregation are banned," and adding that violators could be fined and face up to three months in jail.

While attorneys representing detainees may face challenges in carrying out their duties, prosecutions of those detainees continue. In October, Retired Vice Admiral Bruce MacDonald [official profile] notified both prosecution and defense lawyers in the trial of five detainees held at Guantanamo Bay that he will be accepting recommendations [JURIST report] until early 2012 on whether the trial should move forward as a death penalty case. MacDonald, who was appointed to oversee the military commissions at Guantanamo in 2010, alerted lawyers in the case that they will have until January 15, 2012, to make their recommendations, ensuring that the case will not go to trial at the naval base until sometime next year [Miami Herald report]. The five detainees have been held at Guantanamo since 2006 when they were transferred there from the custody of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) [official website]. The government alleges the men were organizers of the 9/11 [JURIST backgrounder] terrorist attacks, financing and training the men who hijacked the aircrafts used in the attack. MacDonald's communication to counsel also indicates that he will be accepting recommendations in order to determine whether to try the defendants together or separately.

The Eleventh Circuit's decision is the latest example of US and Canadian efforts to foil terrorist plots and hold conspirators accountable. The Supreme Court of Canada [official website] declared in June that it would hear an appeal [JURIST report] in the case of Mohammed Momin Khawaja, who was arrested in 2004 in Canada and found guilty of participating in a terrorist group, instructing a person to finance terrorism, making property available to terrorists, contributing to a terrorist group and facilitating terrorism. Also in June, a US federal jury acquitted Tahawwur Hussain Rana [JURIST report], a Chicago resident with Canadian citizenship, of participating in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks but convicted him on two counts of planning to attack a Copenhagen newspaper. One of the witnesses at Rana's trial, US citizen and Chicago resident David Headley had pleaded guilty [JURIST report] in March to 12 counts of federal terrorism stemming from the Mumbai terror attacks and a terror incident in Copenhagen. US Attorney General Eric Holder [official website] in June defended his plans to prosecute terror suspects in federal civilian courts after consistently advocating [JURIST reports] that terror suspects should be tried in civilian courts, despite a lack of support from Congress.

Last month, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website] temporarily blocked [JURIST report] portions of the law, including Section 28, which requires immigration status checks of public school students, and Section 10, which makes it a misdemeanor for an illegal resident not to have immigration papers. The ruling came in response to a motion filed [JURIST report] by the DOJ and a coalition of immigrants rights groups after a judge for the US District Court for the Northern District of Alabama [official websites] twice refused to block the law [JURIST report] from taking effect. The DOJ argues that the "state regime contravenes the federal government's exclusive authority over immigration." Alabama state officials have defended the law [JURIST report] and argue that the state law is not preempted by federal immigration law and that the text reflects a "spirit of cooperation with the federal government." The state officials point out that the law contains mechanisms safeguarding against unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin and allegations suggesting provisions of the law would deter students from enrolling in school are speculative.

In Minneci v. Pollard [transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court will determine whether federal inmates may sue employees of private prisons where the plaintiff has adequate alternative remedies in state court and defendants have no employment or contractual relationship with the government. The court appeared to be strongly convinced by the government-petitioner's argument that Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics [opinion text] should continue to be used as a last resort and not expanded when state law provides adequate redress: "Over the last 3 decades, the Court has made clear that Bivens remedies are disfavored and will only be authorized in narrow situations where there are no adequate alternative means for redressing a plaintiff's injuries and no other factor counsels hesitation. Respondent has satisfied neither criteria. He has not shown that he lacked a traditional tort remedy for the injuries of which he complains, and Petitioners' status as employees of a private contractor rather than the government at a minimum gives rise to factors counseling hesitation." Respondents argued that Bivens casts a wide net and allows any specific civil action that is not delineated by that state's law, whereas several justices argued with the attorney that almost any action could be addressed by state tort law. Respondent also suggested that as his client was a federal prisoner prosecuted by the federal government, with only access to federal law in the prison library, he should be allowed to address his claims in federal court.

Allied and its CEO exploited a government insurance program to engage in a wholesale shifting of risk away from itself—playing a lending industry equivalent of heads-I-win and tails-you-lose. The losers here were American taxpayers and the thousands of families who faced foreclosure because they could not ultimately fulfill their obligations on mortgages that were deemed to fail.

Only six months ago, Bharara filed a civil suit [complaint] in the SDNY against Deutsche Bank [corporate website] for also allegedly engaging in mortgage fraud [JURIST report]. Similar to the government's current claim, the complaint against Deutsche Bank in May 2011 averred that, from 1999-2009, the bank regularly lied to the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) [official website] in order to obtain and maintain the Direct Endorsement Lender (DEL) status of its subsidiary, MorgageIT. The US argued that during the time this subsidiary acted as a DEL, it endorsed more than 39,000 mortgages for FHA insurance while failing to not only adhere to the program's edibility rules, but also failing to implement quality control procedures.