The right to die [JURIST news archive] has been a contentious issue around the world. The only European countries that allow euthanasia are Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Switzerland. In 2011, an India high court ruled passive euthanasia was permitted [JURIST report] under certain circumstances, but rejected a petition for a mercy killing. In 2010, a German court ruled that removing a patient from life support is not a criminal offense [JURIST report] if the patient had previously given consent. In 2009, the Italian president refused to sign an Italian government decree [JURIST report] that would stop the euthanasia of comatose women because it would violate the separation of power overturning a previous court ruling. In 2006, a proposed bill that would legalize the option of assisted suicide in the UK was set aside by the House of Lords following opposition from the public and two physician groups [JURIST reports]. Also in 2006, the US Supreme Court upheld Oregon's Death with Dignity Act [JURIST report], the only American state law that allows physician assisted suicide.

Rassam's sentence was previously vacated and remanded [JURIST report] by the Ninth Circuit in 2010. The court found that the district court failed to properly consider the sentencing guidelines, which would have required a minimum prison sentence of 65 years. The court also ordered that a different judge be assigned to the case. The prosecution offered Ressam a reduced sentence in exchange for his cooperation against other terrorist suspects, but, over time, Ressam failed to properly cooperate with US government officials. In December 2008, the US District Court for the Western District of Washington re-issued a sentence [JURIST report] of 22 years in prison. In May 2008, the US Supreme Court voted 8-1 to uphold [JURIST report] Ressam's conviction. The court reversed the judgment [JURIST report] of the Ninth Circuit and ruled that Ressam could be convicted and sentenced under a law punishing the carrying of explosives while committing a felony even if the explosives were not related to the felony offense.

There are now 31 US states [NCSL backgrounder] that require voters to present some form of ID at the poll, including 15 states that require photo ID, but the issue remains controversial. In February South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson filed suit against the DOJ over its ruling that barred South Carolina [JURIST reports] from enforcing its voter ID law. Last year Missouri's Governor vetoed a proposed photo ID law, and the Georgia Supreme Court upheld a law [JURIST reports] requiring one of six government-issued photo IDs. In 2010, 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. Last month, Texas also issued new voting maps [JURIST report] for use in the 2012 elections after an "interim map" was challenged before the Supreme Court [official website], which heard arguments [JURIST report] in January. The Obama administration urged the Supreme Court to reject the interim maps [JURIST report].

The UN, as well as human rights groups, have criticized nations' recent crackdowns on peaceful assembly. In December, a group of UN human rights experts denounced a Malaysian law [JURIST report] that limits citizens' freedom to protest. In November, the UN issued a report condemning Syria [JURIST report] for violating a myriad of human rights, including the right to peacefully assemble. Earlier in November, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon [official profile] urged Egyptian officials to protect the right to assemble [JURIST report]. That same month, Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] accused the Ugandan government [JURIST report] of infringing on citizens' freedom of speech and assembly rights.

If you value JURIST, please consider donating so that we can continue to bring you the substantive legal news and commentary that you have come to expect and enjoy. If you are a regular reader, you know what JURIST has to offer. JURIST provides a depth of coverage that is oftentimes unavailable in mainstream media, with links to primary source materials and other contextual information that encourages our readers to form their own opinions about the legal developments that affect their lives. JURIST also highlights legal issues and areas that may get left out by regular legal news coverage in mainstream media. All of this is done in an ad-free, registration-free, open environment.

To continue to pursue our mission, WE NEED YOUR HELP. Although we receive support from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law, we are in fact a completely separate entity. In fact, the majority of our operating costs are covered by gifts coming from outside the University. Given our increasing costs and continued reduction in government support for higher education, I only expect this gap to widen. Hence, we really, really need help from people who believe there is value in what we are doing.

You can read more at http://jurist.org/supportjurist, or if you are ready to join us, you can donate now!

Senegal has been under pressure to send Habre to a country where he will face trial for his alleged war crimes committed during his rule of Chad. In January, a court in Senegal rejected a Belgian court's request to extradite Habre, the former president of Chad, on accusations that he killed and tortured opponents during his regime. In July of last year, Senegal reversed [JURIST report] its decision to send the former dictator back to Chad after UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay warned he could be tortured. The decision came after Pillay issued a plea [JURIST report] not to return Habre to Chad, which has already sentenced him to death in absentia and where she fears he will be tortured.

Evidence suggests that drone strikes in Pakistan are being carried out in violation of international humanitarian law, because the individuals who are being targeted are not directly participating in hostilities and/or because the force used is neither necessary nor proportionate. This suggests that there is also a significant risk that GCHQ officers may be guilty of conduct ancillary to crimes against humanity and/or war crimes, both of which are statutory offences under the International Criminal Court Act 2001.

US targeted strikes on al Qaeda and other terrorist operatives outside Afghanistan and the border regions of Pakistan have triggered extensive debate [JURIST op-ed] about the lawfulness of such strikes, the strategic effectiveness of drone strikes, the political and diplomatic ramifications, and other questions. In December, as part of its protest, Pakistan has demanded that the US vacate the Shamsi Air Base [JURIST op-ed] within 15 days. It is widely believed that the Shamsi base has been regularly used by the US for drone and associated surveillance flights. In July three Pakistani men filed a complaint [JURIST report] seeking to arrest former CIA legal counsel for authorizing unmanned predator drone strikes. The Obama administration has defended [JURIST report] its use of targeted killings, specifically those made by unmanned predator drone strikes.

In restricting human rights organizations from doing their legitimate and essential work, the law has significantly affected the promotion and protection of the rights of the Ethiopian people. Civil society organizations are essential to upholding human rights, equality and justice at all levels of society, and to holding governments to account for their performance and adherence to national and international human rights commitments.

AI claims that the CSP and other regulations such as the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation [text] and the Mass Media Proclamation [text], allow the Ethiopian government to limit freedom of speech and commit human rights violations [AI press release]. In January, the Ethiopian Federal High Court [official website, in Amharic] convicted [JURIST report] three Ethiopian journalists, a political opposition leader and a politician's assistant for conspiring to commit acts of terrorism in violation of the country's Anti-Terrorism Proclamation. HRW reported that the defendants had no access to legal counsel during their three months in pretrial detention and that the court did not investigate allegations of torture and mistreatment while in detention. Under the anti-terrorism law, conspiracy to commit terrorist acts carries a sentence of 15 years to life imprisonment or death. Last year, JURIST guest columnist and former executive director Abigail Salisbury argued that the Ethiopian government is using these regulatory laws to suppress journalists and opposition groups to maintain its hold on power [JURIST op-ed].