Despite one Senate committee's rejection, France's genocide denial ban was passed [JURIST reports] by both the Senate and the National Assembly [official websites, in French] in mid-January. However, the law was contested [JURIST report] only a week later when opposition members of both houses of parliament gathered the necessary signatures to warrant the law's review by the Constitutional Council. Although Sarkozy previously insisted that the law did not specifically target Turkey, the Turkish government repeatedly warned that and affirmation of the law would result in Turkey imposing sanctions on France [AFP report].

In August, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled against [JURIST report] the five states' efforts to stop the Asian carp. The Supreme Court has denied certiorari [AP report] on the issue three times as of April 2010. In December 2009, the state of Michigan filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] in the Supreme Court against the state of Illinois seeking to close the two waterways, as the court has original jurisdiction in disputes between the states. All three times, the court denied certiorari without comment on the dispute. Michigan reopened the longstanding controversy [backgrounder, PDF] over the diversion canal, created in the 1890s to keep Chicago's sewage from flowing into Lake Michigan. The court issued decrees over the canal in 1930, 1933, 1956, 1967 and 1980. The carp have been traveling up the Mississippi and Illinois rivers for years. Tests have showed that the carp may have gotten through an underwater electric barrier and may now be within six miles of Lake Michigan. The fish were originally imported to control algae in fisheries on the Mississippi River, but escaped during a 1990s flood.

A current and valid photo identification or a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter. Such individual who desires to vote in person but who does not show one of the forms of identification specified in this paragraph shall be offered a provisional ballot.

The recent trend of states enacting voter identification laws has been a source of controversy as many opponents feel the laws are intended to dissuade poor or minority voters from participating while others view the requirements as a necessary tool to prevent voter fraud. Earlier this month the Advancement Project [advocacy website] filed a lawsuit [text, PDF] challenging a recent Wisconsin voter ID law [JURIST report]. In August, South Carolina's Senate Minority Caucus filed an objection [JURIST report] with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website], asking it to reject the state's new voter identification law. In June, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon [official website] vetoed [JURIST report] a law requiring persons to present photo identification at voting booth. In March, the Georgia Supreme Court [official website] upheld [JURIST report] a law requiring voters to present one of six government-issued photo identifications in order to vote. In contrast, a three-judge panel for the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] struck down [JURIST report] a portion of Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration in October 2010.

In September, the German constitutional court rejected as unfounded [JURIST report] three constitutional complaints against German and European legal instruments and other measures in connection with both the European Monetary Union rescue package and the financial aid package for Greece. The high court ruled [press release] that by voting through national acts that implement the broader European measures, the Bundestag did not unconstitutionally impair its own ability to adopt and control the nation's budget, nor did it infringe on the budget autonomy of future parliaments. In May 2010, the court refused to issue a temporary injunction [JURIST report] against the German government's €22.4 billion ($28.5 billion) contribution to the bailout package for Greece, which has been gripped by a dire debt crisis [BBC backgrounder] and faces severe austerity measures [JURIST report] as it grapples with its debt. The court held that the complainants seeking the injunction did not produce any concrete evidence that their rights under Germany's Basic Law could be "seriously and irreversibly" affected as a result of the guaranteed loan. The court's press release also noted that potential liability risk as a result of the contribution is outweighed by reducing the risks of damaging Germany's national economy as a result of instability of the European Monetary Union.

Iran has drawn a great deal of international attention recently. Last week, JURIST guest columnist Sasan Fayazmanesh declared [JURIST op-ed] that the latest US sanctions against Iran are part of an escalating trend in American foreign policy that began in the 1980s. Two weeks ago, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon [official profile] urged Iran to cooperate with international diplomacy efforts on its nuclear program [JURIST report]. In early February, US President Barack Obama [official website] signed an executive order [JURIST report] imposing strict sanctions on Iranian financial institutions. In January, an Iranian court sentenced an alleged CIA spy to death [JURIST report] for espionage against Iran.

The ICTR's transfer of Kayishema's case to Rwanda is the second such transfer decision within six months. The ICTR previously decided to transfer the case of Jean-Bosco Uwinkindi [Hague Justice profile; case materials], a former Rwandan pastor, to the national authorities, but, on Friday, Judge Khan ordered [text, PDF] that his transfer to be stayed until a suitable monitoring mechanism has been established. In December, the ICTR Appeals Chamber upheld [JURIST report] the decision to transfer Uwinkindi's case. The initial decision [JURIST report] was made in June when the Referral Chamber determined that Rwanda was capable of accepting and prosecuting Uwinkindi's case.

A Thai court in September 2010 convicted [JURIST report] Sondhi and his former television co-host Sarocha Pornudomsak of defaming former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra [BBC profile; JURIST news archive] during their television show by accusing him of insulting the monarchy. The two were sentenced to six months in prison and ordered to pay fines of 20,000 baht (USD $640). The court suspended the sentence for two years, during which time both Sondi and Sarocha are on probation. Thaksin filed the suit [JURIST report] against Sondhi and several others for their claims that he tried to undermine the monarchy. Thaksin is considered the figurehead of the pro-democracy advocates known as the "red shirts." Sondhi lead the yellow shirts in street protests in 2006 that forced Thaksin to temporarily step aside.

The court also considered Wood v. Milyard [transcript, PDF; JURIST report] to decide if the prosecution failing to raise a statute of limitations argument in response to plaintiff's writ of habeas corpus is an error that can be overturned. Further, specific to this case, if the state's assurance to the plaintiff that they would not raise a statute of limitations argument is enough to bind them to not be able to raise it later in proceedings. The petitioner, Patrick Wood's attorney, argued that the state of Colorado had acted strategically in raising to fail the claim and could not be rewarded for this. The Solicitor General of Colorado argued, in response, that the Supreme Court should, "recognize that courts are not bound by a State's failure to properly argue and preserve a procedural bar to a habeas claim; and second, to the extent there is an exception to that rule for deliberate waivers, the court should apply the common rule that a waiver must be unequivocal."

I further call upon the Government of Syria to allow independent international monitors to visit all places of detention and grant unhindered access to humanitarian actors. I also call on the Government of Syria to release all political prisoners and persons who have been arbitrarily detained. The Government must launch prompt, independent and impartial investigations in accordance with international standards to end impunity, ensure accountability, bring perpetrators to justice, and to take measures to ensure adequate, effective and prompt reparation for the victims.

The increasing unrest in Syria has grabbed international attention. Last week, the UN-appointed Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria accused the government of violating international human rights law [JURIST report] after finding that Syrian forces are engaging in torture and killings under orders from high level government officials. Syrian officials announced Monday that over 80 percent of voters in the country approved the new constitution [JURIST report], which imposes term limits on the president and provides for a multi-party system. However, Western leaders called the referendum a "farce" and condemned [Independent report] the "sham vote" that cannot be a way of resolving the ongoing violence. Earlier this month, both Pillay and UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon [official profile] called for an end to the violence in Syria, with Pillay asking the UN Security Council to refer the situation in Syria [JURIST reports] to the International Criminal Court (ICC). Pillay urged an investigation of Syrian government and military officials for possible crimes against humanity. The OHCHR reports that more than 5,000 people have died since anti-government protests began last March.

Kosovo was recognized as an independent state by the US and several major EU countries in February 2008, and the EULEX has been investigating war crimes [JURIST reports] since December 2008. In November, Kosovo politician and parliamentarian Fatmir Limaj went on trial [JURIST report] for war crimes allegedly committed during the 1998-99 Kosovo war with Serbia [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. In October, the EULEX sentenced a former ethnic Albanian rebel fighter [JURIST report] to five years in prison for crimes committed against civilians during the same conflict. In September, the EULEX charged 10 former members [JURIST report] of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), including Fatmir Limaj, with war crimes.