"Gender identity" shall mean a person's gender-related identity, appearance or behavior, whether or not that gender-related identity, appearance or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's physiology or assigned sex at birth. Gender-related identity may be shown by providing evidence including, but not limited to, medical history, care or treatment of the gender-related identity, consistent and uniform assertion of the gender-related identity or any other evidence that the gender-related identity is sincerely held, as part of a person's core identity; provided however, gender-related identity shall not be asserted for improper purpose.

Protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals remains a diverse political issue. In June of this year, Connecticut passed similar legislation [JURIST report] defining "gender identity or expression" and providing protection in the state's existing anti-discrimination laws. Other national action includes measures to stop hate crimes against LGBT individuals. In March, US Representative Jared Polis (D-CO) and Senator Al Franken (D-MN) [official websites] introduced legislation to protect LGBT students from bullying [JURIST report] in federally funded public elementary and high schools. In 2009, US President Barack Obama signed into law [JURIST report] a bill that contained a measure extending the definition of federal hate crimes to include crimes motivated by gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. Internationally, homosexuality remains a criminal offense in more than 70 countries around the world, and statistics show that anti-LGBT crimes are on the rise worldwide and in the US [JURIST reports]. These crimes, in addition to the absence of state protection against employment discrimination, have been estimated to cost US states millions of dollars annually [JURIST op-ed].

This is not the first issue human rights groups have had concerns over democracy in Equatorial Guinea. Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] condemned [press release] the government for the execution of four men convicted [JURIST report] of an attempted assassination on Obiang in 2009. AI received reports that claimed the men were tortured while in prison and forced to confess to the crimes. One of the convicted men requested to see his family, but by the time they arrived at the prison he had already been executed. Obiang defended [JURIST report] the decision, stating that no laws were broken and all necessary legal procedures were followed.

Many states continue to debate issues pertaining to same-sex marriage [JURIST news archives]. Last week, a New Jersey court ruled [JURIST report] that a marriage equality lawsuit, which seeks to overturn New Jersey's civil unions law on equal protection grounds, could proceed. In October, the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network [advocacy website] filed suit [JURIST report] in federal court arguing that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) [text; JURIST news archives] unconstitutionally denies gay couples equal protection under the law. Despite DOMA, same-sex marriage is currently legal in New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Iowa, Connecticut, Washington, D.C. and within the Squamish Tribe [JURIST reports]. Civil unions or domestic partnerships are currently legal in Maine, Illinois, Delaware, Hawaii, California, Wisconsin, Nevada, Oregon and Washington and await ratification in Rhode Island [JURIST reports].

The Chamber ordered that the medical expert provide an assessment of Mladic's overall current health condition as well as an evaluation of his medical history, including the background to and current status of any health condition predating Mladic's arrival at the Detention Unit. The medical expert is to assess whether and to what extent his current overall health condition is related to his medical history.

In October, the ICTY prosecutor refused to seek further appeal [JURIST report] of the tribunal's refusal to split Mladic's trial into separate actions: one for his conduct during the Srebrenica massacre [JURIST news archive], where approximately 8,000 people were killed, and one for all of his other charges during the Bosnian civil war [JURIST news archive]. Mladic made his first appearance [JURIST report] at the ICTY in June, contesting the charges while simultaneously asking for more time to review them, which he was granted. At his second appearance [JURIST report] he refused to enter a plea. Before that, he had lost his final appeal in Serbia to avoid extradition, and was transported to The Hague [JURIST reports]. Serbian authorities captured Mladic [JURIST report] in May, ending a 16-year manhunt for the former general colonel and commander of the army of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mladic faces charges of genocide and crimes against humanity, including murder, political persecution, forcible transfer and deportations, cruel treatment and the taking of peacekeepers as hostages.

The military government has no business prosecuting Abdel Fattah, or any other civilian, in a military court, much less in a case involving the military's own unlawful violence against protesters. These charges presented without evidence against one of the country's best known activists are further reflection of the military's desire to silence its critics.

The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights [official website] last week expressed [JURIST report] in its briefing notes [text] concerns of Egypt's limitation for freedom of expression and association calling for release of Abd El Fattah who merely exercised his fundamental right to free speech. Earlier this month, the Egyptian activist group No Military Trials for for Civilians [Al Jazeera profile] condemned [statement, text] Abd El Fattah's arrest and imprisonment. The blogger and activist was initially imprisoned [JURIST report] for the charges [Bikay Masr report] last month.

[D]eterminations about the conditions under which aliens may live in the United States, including unlawfully present aliens, based specifically on their status as such, are reserved for the National Government. It is the National Government that is responsive to the competing goals of immigration policy on behalf of all the States and to the foreign policy concerns that must inform determinations about how foreign nationals in our Nation should be treated. ... H.B. 56 acts as a state immigration policy and not as a mechanism to regulate areas of legitimate state interest.

In October, the Eleventh Circuit temporarily blocked [JURIST report] portions of the law after the US District Court for Northern Alabama [official website] twice refused to do so. Religious groups and representatives of several rights groups including the 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]. Since the legislation was signed into law in June, 16 countries filed briefs [JURIST reports] 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.

Colom has also faced recent legal trouble. In August, the Guatemalan Constitutional Court [official website, in Spanish] ruled that former first lady Sandra Torres is ineligible to run for the office of president [JURIST report] because of her relationship to Colom, her ex-husband. Torres and Colom divorced earlier this year [BBC report] after Torres announced her plans to represent the ruling National Unity for Hope party in elections that will be held in September. The Guatemalan Constitution [text, PDF] bans relatives of the president from running for the office. Court President Alejandro Maldonado Aguirre held that because Torres was Colom's wife for most of the term, Torres would be in violation of the Constitution if she were to run for office. Otto Perez Molina, Torres' main opposition and leader of the Patriot Party, accused the two of fraud [BBC report] for divorcing in an effort to circumvent the constitutional ban. However, the court did not rule on whether this issue.

Last month, the ICTB for the first time accepted charges against a suspect [JURIST report]—another senior opposition leader. Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, head of Jamaat e Islami (JI) [GlobalSecurity backgrounder], is charged with similar war crimes, also allegedly stemming from the 1971 conflict. The ICTB has accepted 20 of 31 charges including allegations of aiding anti-liberation forces through murder, rape, torching villages, looting and forcibly converting Hindus to Islam. The ICTB originally issued four arrest warrants [JURIST report] for such crimes in July 2010, and all four were filed against leaders of the JI. In May Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] sent a letter to the Bangladesh government praising its efforts through the ICTB to prosecute those responsible for atrocities committed during the war, but urging the government to ensure that the trials are carried out in accordance with international human rights expectations [JURIST report]. Bangladesh established the ICTB [JURIST report] in March 2010.

Tymoshenko's prosecution has been highly controversial [JURIST comment] and has drawn harsh criticism internationally. The EU has condemned [JURIST report] her conviction as politically motivated and has indicated that it could harm Ukraine's bid for EU accession. In June, Tymoshenko filed a complaint [JURIST report] with the European Court of Human Rights alleging violations of the European Convention of Human Rights [text, PDF]. The complaint argued that the charges against Tymoshenko are politically engineered by current Yanukovych. Tymoshenko's government was dissolved in March 2010 after she narrowly lost the presidential election to Yanukovych. Tymoshenko had alleged that widespread voter fraud allowed Yanukovych to win the election. In August, the Kiev Appeals Court refused Tymoshenko's appeal of her detention for contempt charges [JURIST reports]. Tymoshenko's government was dissolved in March 2010 after she narrowly lost the presidential election to Yanukovych. Tymoshenko had alleged that widespread voter fraud allowed Yanukovych to win the election.