JURIST - Paper Chase: Saturday, April 21, 2012

[JURIST] Two former cadets from the US Military Academy and the US Naval Academy [official websites] brought a suit [text] in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York [official website] alleging that the service academies failed to prevent rapes. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the service academies promoted a culture of sexual assault, they failed to implement regulations regarding sexual assault, they failed to investigate claims of sexual assault and prosecute offenders and they retaliated against victims who reported being sexually assaulted. The complaint further alleges that:

Both institutions claim to be teaching young men and women to hold themselves to the highest standards of ethical conduct. Yet both institutions systematically and repeatedly ignore rampant sexual harassment. Both institutions have a history of failing to prosecute and punish those students found to have sexually assaulted and and raped their fellow students. Although Defendants and other military leadership repeatedly claim they have "zero tolerance" for such misconduct, the evidence shows otherwise: they have a high tolerance for sexual predators in their ranks, and "zero tolerance" for those who report rape, sexual assault and harassment.

Finally, the complaint alleges that the defendants actively sought to impede congressional oversight by directing witnesses to ignore subpoenas, sought to "muddle" rape reporting statistics and hired an inexperienced firm to implement the service academies' obligations to prevent sexual assault. Neither institution has commented on the allegations.

Sexual assault, sexual harassment and rape have been controversial subjects for the service academies. In 2005 the US Defense Department Task Force on Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Service Academies found that sexual assault at service academies was still a problem [JURIST report]. A report [text, PDF] released by the Air Force in 2004 in response to an anonymous email alleging that sexual assaults were ignored by US Air Force Academy [official website] leadership found that in ten of fifty six sexual assault complaints "a logical investigative step was omitted," including failing to conduct additional interviews. A survey [NYT report] conducted in 2003 found that 12% of women graduating from the US Air Force Academy were victims of rape or attempted rape at the Academy and that almost 70% were the victim of sexual harassment.

[JURIST] The Mexican legislature passed a sweeping climate change bill on Thursday 128-10 in the Chamber of Deputies [official website, in Spanish] and unanimously in the Senate [official website, in Spanish]. The bill requires the country to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 30% by 2020, requires 35% of its energy come form renewable sources by 2024, requires mandatory emissions reporting, establishes a carbon-trading market and creates a commission to oversee implementation of the bill. The bill now goes to Mexican President Felipe Calderon [official website, in Spanish] to sign into law.

Mexico is following a global trend of countries implementing their own climate change laws, rather then relying on international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol [text; JURIST news archive]. In December Canada withdrew [JURIST report] from the Kyoto Protocol. Earlier in December 194 countries agreed to extend [JURIST report] the Kyoto Protocol until 2017 after they failed to institute a new internationally-binding climate change treaty in 2009. In November Australia passed a law that imposes a price on carbon emissions [JURIST report] in an effort to improve the environment and the country's economy. In 2007 the UK introduced its own climate change legislation [JURIST report], pledging to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 60% by 2050. The Kyoto Protocol was adopted [JURIST report] in 2005.

[JURIST] A North Carolina judge on Friday commuted [order text, PDF] a man's death sentence to a sentence of life in prison without parole after he determined that racial bias was a major influence behind the original sentence 18 years ago. Judge Gregory Weeks vacated Marcus Reymond Robinson's death sentence after he determined that race was a significant factor in choosing members of the jury for Robinson's trial. Under the state's Racial Justice Act [PDF], individuals who have received a death sentence now may present evidence showing that racial bias was a major factor in the death sentence being applied. In his order, Weeks found that "[t]he prosecutor intentionally used the race of venire members as a significant factor in his decisions to exercise peremptory strikes in Robinson's capital trial." The order marks first decision to change a sentence under the Act.

The decision to transform Robinson's death sentence because of racial bias is expected to have a great impact on capital punishment discussions nationwide. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) [advocacy website] on Friday released a statement [text] expressing its approval of the North Carolina decision. In its statement, the ACLU expressed hope that the United States is moving in a direction towards abolishing the death penalty. The statement also notes the significance of Weeks' decision coming almost exactly 25 years after the Supreme Court ruled that "evidence of systemic bias is not sufficient to challenge a death sentence" in the case of McCleskey v. Kemp [opinion text].

[JURIST] The 47 member states composing the Council of Europe [official website] on Friday agreed to a declaration [text] that will bring new changes to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] in order to make it more efficient. The declaration, which comes as an attempt to better facilitate operations at the overloaded ECHR, includes a provision that makes is easier for the court to reject cases [AFP report] that should not be at the international court level. The declaration also provides for more funding to go to the ECHR in order to increase resources and staff. While provisions already exist that require a case to exhaust all appeals within the member state, the declaration gives these provisions a more narrow interpretation and requires member states to apply ECHR rulings to cases involving similar facts in order to avoid backlogs of cases. All member states still need to officially ratify the declaration, which is expected to be complete by 2013.

The ECHR declaration is intended to allow the court to continue hearing cases concerning various international issues. Just last week, Muslim Cleric Abu Qatada lodged an appeal [JURIST report] of his deportation from the UK with the European Court of Human Rights. Last month, the court urged [JURIST report] the Ukrainian government to ensure that former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko receive adequate medical treatment during the time she is imprisoned. Also last month, the ECHR ruled [JURIST report] that the right of a person in a same-sex partnership to adopt his or her partner's child is not protected by the European Convention on Human Rights.