Apart from Israel, Nazi symbolism has been controversial in other countries as well. In 2007, the German Federal Court of Justice ruled Nazi symbols could be used to protest extremism [JURIST report], overturning a prior decision by a state court in Stuttgart. The lower court had ordered Juergen Kamm, who began an Internet company called Nix Gut, to pay a fine of 3,600 euros (US $4,600) for selling T-shirts and badges featuring a swastika surrounded by a red circle and slash. Judge Walter Winkler ruled that for any symbol to be allowed, the anti-Nazi meaning had to be immediately apparent. In 2005, The EU ended consideration of proposals [JURIST report] that would have banned Nazi symbols in the 25-country bloc after it became apparent that member states could not agree on which symbols should be included in the ban.

In Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency [transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court heard arguments on whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] can enforce a compliance order issued without any opportunity to contest the order. The Sacketts own land near Priest Lake, Idaho, on which they intended to build a house. After purchasing the property and obtaining local permits, they began to grade the land for construction of a house. They received an EPA Administrative Compliance Order that said the grading of the land was in violation of the Clean Water Act (CWA) [text, PDF] and imposed harsh civil penalties for non-compliance. The Sacketts disagree that their property is a wetland under the meaning of the CWA. The case raises the issue of whether the CWA precludes pre-enforcement judicial review, and if so, whether that violates the petitioner's Due Process [Cornell LII backgrounder] rights. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld [opinion, PDF] the dismissal of the suit. The justices appeared skeptical of the EPA's arguments Monday, with Justice Samuel Alito asking the EPA's lawyer, "if you related the facts of this case as they come to us to an ordinary homeowner, don't you think most ordinary homeowners would say this kind of thing can't happen in the United States?"

In Kappos v. Hyatt [transcript, PDF; JURIST report], the court heard arguments on patent law. When the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) [official website] denies an application for a patent, the applicant may seek judicial review of the agency's final action through either of two avenues. The applicant may obtain direct review of the agency's determination in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit under 35 USC § 141 [text]. Alternatively, the applicant may commence a civil action against the Director of the PTO in federal district court under 35 USC § 145 [text] The court will decide whether a plaintiff in a § 145 action may introduce new evidence that could have been presented to the agency in the first instance. The court will also consider whether, when new evidence is introduced under § 145, the district court may decide de novo the factual questions to which the evidence pertains, without giving deference to the prior decision of the PTO. The Federal Circuit held [opinion, PDF] that "§ 145 imposes no limitation on an applicant's right to introduce new evidence before the district court."

Freedom of expression, association and assembly were promised, but the harsh reality is that criticism of the new authorities is not tolerated, activists are being targeted, and NGOs are being threatened with intrusive criminal investigations. Peaceful demonstrators continue to be forcibly dispersed, leading to clashes with riot police and deaths. Greater political participation by all Egyptians was promised, yet women have again been marginalized. Many independent trade unions have been formed, but the authorities have banned strikes. A better future for all Egyptians was promised, but nearly one year on millions of people continue to live in slums and in poverty, and wait for their voices to be heard.

The violence and protests have have also caused concern at the UN. In December, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon issued a statement chastising both the government of President Bashar al-Assad and violent protesters regarding the continuous bloodshed in Syria [JURIST report]. Also in December UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay condemned the brutal crackdown [JURIST report] on protesters by military and security forces in Egypt. In November, AI issued a report which concluded that Egypt's ruling military council has committed numerous human rights violations [JURIST report], including abuse of protesters and journalists who voice their dissatisfaction with the government.

Two ex-Blackwater contractors were convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison [JURIST reports] last year for their role in the shooting deaths of two Afghan nationals and the wounding of a third. In April a federal grand jury indicted five former Blackwater executives [JURIST report] on charges of weapons violations and lying to investigators. In 2010 the Iraqi government ordered 250 former Blackwater employees to leave Iraq in reaction to the dismissal of criminal charges [JURIST reports] against the guards involved in the 2007 shooting incident. The same month, the Department of Justice [official website] also opened an investigation [JURIST report] into whether Blackwater bribed the Iraqi government to be permitted to continue operating in Iraq following the 2007 shootings. Blackwater ceased operations in Baghdad [JURIST report] in May 2009 when its security contracts expired and were not renewed.

Also Friday, the court agreed to rule in Florida v. Jardines [docket, cert. petition, PDF] to determine whether the use of a drug-sniffing dog at the front door of a house is a search under the Fourth Amendment [text] requiring probable cause. The Supreme Court of Florida ruled [opinion, PDF] in April that the "sniff test" was a search under the Fourth Amendment and required probable cause, not reasonable suspicion.

On Monday the court denied certiorari [order list, PDF] in Cash v. Maxwell [docket], upholding the Ninth Circuit decision [opinion, PDF] reversing the 1984 conviction of Bobby Joe Maxwell for the murders of 10 homeless men. The Ninth Circuit presented evidence showing that Maxwell's conviction had been based on testimony from an unreliable witness. However, Justices Scalia and Alito dissented to the denial of certiorari, arguing that the Ninth Circuit relied on circumstantial evidence and that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of1996 (AEDPA) [text] prevented federal reconsideration of the case. Also Monday, the court affirmed a lower court ruling in Bluman v. FEC [docket; jurisdictional statement, PDF] that foreign nationals living in the US cannot contribute to US election campaigns, making clear that its controversial decision in Citizens United v. FEC [JURIST report] does not extend beyond US citizens.

In December UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said that the Bahrain government should release prisoners detained during peaceful protests [JURIST report] and focus on rebuilding national trust in the government. Pillay's statement followed a visit by a team of human rights officials to Bahrain at the invitation of the Bahrain government. In November Bahraini King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa [official website] ordered a special commission [JURIST report] to look into government recommendations made in a report by an independent Bahraini government commission. The report stated that Bahrain authorities used excessive force [JURIST report] and tortured detainees involved in the pro-democracy demonstrations earlier this year. Also in November, the Bahrain government admitted the use of excessive force [JURIST report] in anticipation of the independent report.

The two-year sodomy trial concluded last month when the prosecution delivered its closing arguments, following the defense's closing arguments in October and Anwar's testimony in August denying the charges [JURIST reports]. A Malaysian court ruled [JURIST report] in May that prosecutors had enough evidence to continue to pursue the sodomy case against Anwar. The opposition leader was arrested in July 2008 after he filed a lawsuit against his accuser [JURIST reports] a month earlier. In December 2010, Anwar filed a complaint [JURIST report] in a Malaysian court over a WikiLeaks [website] cable published by Australian newspapers stating he had engaged in sodomy. Anwar was Malaysia's deputy prime minister under former Mahathir Mohamad until he was fired in 1998 following earlier sodomy charges of which he was initially convicted but later acquitted. He reentered Malaysian politics following the expiration of a 10-year ban [JURIST report] against him for unrelated corruption charges.

Preliminary hearings [JURIST report] for Hekmati began last month. Leading evidence against Hekmati included the confession made on Iranian state television [Naharnet report] where he admitted his mission was to infiltrate Iran's intelligence systems by initially offering information to gain their trust and in order to find evidence that Iran was involved in terrorist activity [CNN report]. Herkmati told the court that he was fooled by the CIA and did not want to hurt Iran, according to a Fars News report [FNA report]. The US contends that the allegations against Hekmati are false and that his confessions were forced [AFP report].