JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE ARCHIVEDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.
Listen to Paper Chase!


Legal news from Friday, August 17, 2012




Moscow court upholds 100-year city ban on gay pride marches
Dan Taglioli on August 17, 2012 2:58 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] A city court in Moscow on Friday refused to overturn the municipal government's ban on gay pride marches for the next century. The court affirmed the Moscow municipal government ruling that any public gatherings that could be classified as gay pride marches are prohibited from March 2012 until May 2112. Russia's best-known gay rights campaigner Nikolay Alexeyev challenged the ban in court [BBC report] after he was refused a license for a parade. The city government argues that a gay pride parade would risk causing public disorder and that most Muscovites do not support such an event. Alexeyev has stated that he never actually expected to be granted a license, but needed the refusal to serve as the basis for a cause of action in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website]. The ECHR has already ordered Russia to pay Alexeyev [JURIST report] an award of 12,000 euros for non-pecuniary damages plus 17,510 euros for costs and attorneys fees (USD $41,090 total) for rejecting his license application. The ECHR stated that Russia had discriminated against the activist on the basis of his sexual orientation. Alexeyev stated he intends to appeal to ECHR again as he continues his judicial fight against the ban.

Russia has long struggled with the acceptance of homosexuality. In March St. Petersburg announced that the city's governor had signed into law a bill that would impose fines against people convicted of promoting homosexuality, including gays or lesbians who are open about their sexuality—individuals convicted under the law would be subject to fines between 3,000 and 5,000 rubles (US $100-160) [Moscow Times report], while organizations could be fined up to 50,000 rubles for "promoting" homosexuality. In December Senior Lecturer of Sociology at the University of Surrey Paul Johnson [university profile] wrote that the latest ban by Russian authorities on the promotion of homosexuality to minors is only the most recent violation of the ECHR ruling [JURIST comment] on the subject. Internationally the UN has attempted to pass resolutions aimed at ending sexuality discrimination worldwide, but has faced difficulty passing resolutions on gay rights issues. Last year UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) [official website] passed the "Human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity" resolution [text, PDF], which is the first resolution to call for an end to sexuality discrimination worldwide [JURIST report]. In 2010 UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon [official website] called for countries around the world to abolish laws discriminating against gay and lesbian individuals [JURIST report].




Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Federal appeals court again validates cancer gene patents
Dan Taglioli on August 17, 2012 12:32 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) [official website] on Thursday ruled [opinion, PDF] for the second time in Association for Molecular Pathology v. US Patent and Trademark Office (AMP) that a Utah company does have valid patents on two genes associated with breast and ovarian cancers. AMP concerned Myriad Genetics [official website] patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2 [NCI backgrounder], isolated human genes that differ from native genes in that the process of extracting them results in changes in their molecular structure, although not in their genetic code. Arguing that the process of isolating genetic material from a human DNA molecule does not make the isolated genetic material (cDNA) a patentable invention, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) [advocacy websites; press release] in 2009 filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) [official website], which then invalidated all of Myriad's patents [JURIST report]. Last year in a 2-1 ruling the Federal Circuit reversed in part [opinion, PDF; JURIST report], rejecting Myriad's method patent but holding the gene patents themselves valid as "the difference between knowledge of nature and reducing a portion of nature to concrete form, the latter activity being what the patent laws seek to encourage and protect." This year the same CAFC three-judge panel reheard the case on remand from the US Supreme Court [official website] based on the Court's March decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories [opinion, PDF; JURIST report], in which it ruled that in order for something to be patentable it must add enough to a natural phenomena to make it different than anything found in nature. The ACLU and PUBPAT argued that Mayo "gave new vigor" to the principles used in determining whether a product of nature has been "transformed" enough to make it patentable, and that it supports the conclusion that cDNA is not patentable material. The CAFC, however, again ruled against the advocacy groups [ACLU press release], renewing its decision to "reverse the district court's decision that Myriad's composition claims to 'isolated' DNA molecules cover patent-ineligible products of nature under §101 because each of the claimed molecules represents a nonnaturally occurring composition of matter." The CAFC also again rejected one of Myriad's method patents for analyzing DNA sequences but upheld its patent for cancer screening.

The ACLU and PUPAT were concerned that these types of patents limit the amount of research that can be done and the availability of diagnostic tests associated with these genes to women in need. They filed a petition for certiorari [JURIST report] in the Supreme Court in 2011 after the Federal Circuit ruling that the patents were valid. The CAFC decisions run contrary to the position of the Obama administration, which in 2010 filed an amicus curiae brief [JURIST report] in support of the ACLU and PUBPAT. JURIST Guest Columnist Doreen Hogle [official profile] argued that the Mayo decision raised questions as to what innovations are subject to patent law protection and may result in stifled investment in technology [JURIST comment].




Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


Russia punk feminists receive 2-year prison sentence on hooliganism conviction
Dan Taglioli on August 17, 2012 11:58 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The controversial trial [RAPSI materials] of three members of the Russian feminist activist group Pussy Riot ended Friday with the announcement [hearing transcript] of a guilty verdict and two-year prison sentence for each of the three women. The Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow found Pussy Riot members Natalia Tolokonnikova, Maria Alyokhina and Yekaterina Samutsevich guilty of "hooliganism" characterized by the court as driven by religious hatred. The three women were tried for their "guerilla performance" of a protest song in February at the altar of downtown Moscow's Christ the Savior Cathedral, a space maintained to be sacred to the Russian Orthodox Church. Defense counsel for the women lambasted the prosecution and reiterated their intent to appeal [RAPSI report] to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] both the verdict and alleged rights violations that have occurred throughout the trial. The lawyers have alleged that they have not been allowed to speak with their clients in private and that because each day of trial lasted over 10 hours their clients were deprived of adequate sleep. They also stated that their clients did not received hot food once the trial began, prompting an ambulance to be called during the third day of the trial after the women reported feeling ill. Prosecutors had requested a three-year sentence [JURIST report] for each of the band members.

The trial of the three activists has created controversy and has been criticized as politically motivated move by Russian President Vladimir Putin [official website; JURIST news archive] to discredit his opposition. This month lawyers for the women requested that the judge recuse herself [JURIST report] because her decisions were politically motivated. Judge Marina Syrova declined to hear the defense motion for her recusal and moved forward with the trial. The defense had also moved for the judge's recusal [RAPSI report] last month but that motion was also denied. The women were arrested in March and the trial began at the end of July [JURIST report].




Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


ICC urged to investigate Rwanda president for arming DRC rebels
Dan Taglioli on August 17, 2012 10:10 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The International Criminal Court [official website; JURIST backgrounder] on Friday received requests to investigate Rwandan President Paul Kagame [official profile] for backing armed rebels in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) [BBC backgrounder; JURIST news archive]. Rwandan and Congolese advocacy groups opposed to Kagame's rule have alleged that the Rwandan leader is guilty of war crimes for helping to create and arm rebel groups in eastern DRC including M23, which has been conducting a mutiny in North Kivu Province under the leadership of a particularly notorious group of human rights violators. The calls for an ICC investigation follow the release of a UN report last month detailing investigations since late 2011 that revealed substantial evidence [JURIST report] that the Rwandan government helped create the rebel groups and supplied them with weapons, armor and recruits, including children. In June UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] estimated that the armed conflict between the DRC government and the M23 movement has displaced around 218,000 people [JURIST report] from their homes since April, specifically mentioning five M23 leaders and describing them as the "worst perpetrators of human rights violations in the DRC, or in the world for that matter."

The unrest in the eastern part of the DRC has been a focus of the international community recently. Last month US Office of Global Criminal Justice (GCJ) [official website] leader Stephen Rapp [official profile] announced that Rwandan leaders who armed the DRC rebels as alleged in the UN report may have committed war crimes [JURIST report] by providing systematic military and political support groups known for committing human rights violations. The UN report was leaked to the media in late June. Foreign Policy magazine revealed information [JURIST report] from the report in June but the Rwandan government rejected the allegations. Earlier that month Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] urged the Rwandan government to stop [JURIST report] assisting accused DRC war criminal General Bosco Ntaganda [ICC case materials], who is wanted by the ICC. In 2010 a UN report claimed [JURIST report] that troops from Rwanda had committed crimes in the DRC that could amount to genocide.




Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


UN to end Syria observer mission
Sarah Paulsworth on August 17, 2012 8:06 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) [official website] will cease its work [official statement, PDF] on Sunday at midnight, UN Assistant Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Edmund Mulet announced a press briefing on Thursday. According to Mulet, the mission must cease its work because the two conditions required by the UN Security Council to renew UNSMIS' mandate, the cessation of the use of heavy weapons and the reduction in violence from all sides, do not exist. In meantime, the UN will be working with the Department of Public Affairs to establish a liaison office in Damascus, Mulet said. The mission's mandate was most recently extended on July 20 for 30 days [JURIST report]. UNSMIS, approved in April, sent up to 300 unarmed military observers and other humanitarian aid [JURIST report] to supervise the implementation of a peace plan, however most of the monitoring was suspended in June due to increased risk from rising violence.

On Monday head of UNSMIS Lieutenant General Babacar Gayee expressed concern [JURIST report] about the growing number of civilian casualties in violent clashes between government forces and armed opposition groups. In July UN Chief Military Observer in Syria Major-General Robert Mood stated that Syrian authorities were committed to implementing the six-point peace agreement [JURIST reports] that was reached a week earlier. In June a UN commission stated that Syrian forces "may have been responsible" [JURIST report] for the killing of more than 100 civilians in Al-Houla in May. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad [JURIST news archive] had denied [JURIST report] the allegations stating that "not even monsters" would carry out the attacks.




Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page


New Zealand high court denies US appeal to limit evidence disclosure in copyright case
Dan Taglioli on August 17, 2012 7:17 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Supreme Court of New Zealand [official website] declined [judgment, PDF] Wednesday to overturn a lower court decision holding that US authorities must turn over a large amount of evidence in order to secure the extradition of Megaupload.com founder Kim Dotcom, who is accused of orchestrating the largest copyright infringement in the country's history. Justice Helen Winkelmann rejected the US appeal to limit the amount of information requested, which the US claims is unprecedented in quantity [Bloomberg report] anywhere for extradition cases, and includes all records connected to covert operations undertaken by agents involved in the investigation. Dotcom, 38, was indicted in the US on charges that his file-sharing service has generated more than $175 million in criminal proceeds from the exchange of pirated film, music, book and software files. The US is currently seeking extradition from New Zealand for a trial in Virginia. Dotcom faces as long as 20 years in prison for each of the racketeering and money-laundering charges in the indictment.

Internet media piracy is a global issue. Last month the European Parliament [official website] overwhelmingly voted to reject [press release] the proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) [text, PDF], which is designed to curb intellectual property theft such as production of counterfeit goods and medicine, as well as digital file-sharing of pirated media. The International Trade Committee (INTA) [official website] of the European Parliament rejected the ACTA [JURIST report] in June after concluding that its vague language and disproportional fines could infringe upon individuals' right to free expression. In February the European Commission announced [JURIST report] that it would seek guidance from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) before ratifying the ACTA to ease protesters' concerns with the ACTA's possible censorship of free expression. Hearings on a similar bill in the US were postponed [JURIST report] in January by Representative Darrell Issa [official website] of California. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) [text, PDF] would have effectively blocked foreign websites that are suspected to infringe copyrights and give the US Department of Justice (DOJ) increased authority in counterfeiting copyright infringement.




Link | | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | archive | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST OP-ED

The War on Terror and the Need for Muslim Support
DOMESTIC
Faisal Kutty
Valparaiso University Law School

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

SYNDICATION

Add Paper Chase legal news to your RSS reader or personalized portal:
  • Add to Google
  • Add to My Yahoo!
  • Subscribe with Bloglines
  • Add to My AOL

E-MAIL

Subscribe to Paper Chase by e-mail. JURIST offers a free once-a-day digest [sample]. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.


R|mail e-mails individual Paper Chase posts through the day. Enter your e-mail address below. After subscribing and being returned to this page, please check your e-mail for a confirmation message.

PUBLICATION

Join top US law schools, federal appeals courts, law firms and legal organizations by publishing Paper Chase legal news on your public website or intranet.

JURIST offers a news ticker and preformatted headline boxes updated in real time. Get the code.

Feedroll provides free Paper Chase news boxes with headlines or digests precisely tailored to your website's look and feel, with content updated every 15 minutes. Customize and get the code.

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org