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, October 12, 2012




UN: Iran must halt capital punishment
Michael Haggerson on October 12, 2012 2:14 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] called on Iran Friday to immediately stop all executions [press release], including 11 planned for Saturday. The OHCHR stated that Iran has failed to provide the accused with due process and fair trials and that the death penalty is not appropriate for certain crimes for which Iran is using it, including drug offenses. The UN has repeatedly called on Iran to abandon the death penalty, but instead the country has increased the number of people it is executing. More than 300 people have been executed in Iran since the beginning of 2012, mostly for drug charges, and many more are believed to be on death row.

Iran has been heavily criticized for its use of the death penalty. In June three UN Special Rapporteurs condemned [JURIST report] Iran for executing four members of the Ahwazi Arab minority without providing them fair trials. The three UN Special Rapporteurs further stated that there is no transparency to Iranian court proceedings and that the death penalty should be reserved for only the most serious of crimes. In November the UN Human Rights Committee [official website] expressed concern [JURIST report] about the protection of individuals' rights in Iran, including the frequency of the use of the death penalty. In January 2011, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran claimed that Iran is on an "execution binge" [JURIST report], killing one prisoner every eight hours. In January 2010 Amnesty International [advocacy website] condemned [JURIST report] Iran for executing 11 individuals on charges of mohareb, or being enemies of God, after appearing in televised show trials for their roles in post-election protests in 2009 .




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


HRW: Nigeria Islamist group, government forces committing rights abuses
Michael Haggerson on October 12, 2012 1:47 PM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Nigerian government security forces and Islamist militant group Boko Haram [BBC backgrounder] have likely both committed crimes against humanity in the conflict between the two groups which began in 2009, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] reported [text, PDF; press release] Thursday. The report states that Boko Haram attacks have killed more than 1,500 people, primarily police and government forces, Christians, and Muslims accused of cooperating with government forces. The group is accused of bombing police stations, newspaper offices, Christian churches and a UN building. The group is also accused of executing police officers, forcing Christian men to convert to Islam or be murdered and assassinating Muslim clerics and political officials in the government. The report states that Nigerian security forces are also guilty of human rights abuses, however, including using excessive force, burning homes, abusing suspects and executing Boko Haram suspects without a trial. The report calls on Boko Haram to cease its attacks immediately and for the Nigerian government to halt its own abuses and bring individuals on both sides of the conflict to justice.

Boko Haram, which means "Western education is a sin," has been fighting to overthrow the Nigerian government and create an Islamic state and has warned Christians in the mostly Muslim northern regions to leave the area. The group has publicly claimed responsibility for several attacks, including church bombings [AP report] on December 25 that killed approximately 40 people. In January UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay [official profile] urged Nigerian leaders from all sectors of society to make a concerted effort to stop the sectarian violence [JURIST report]. Although Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan [BBC profile] quickly promised to bring the militants to justice, he has since declared a state of emergency [WP report] in several locations. The Christmas day bombings were internationally condemned, including being labeled as "senseless violence" by the White House [AP report] and "acts of "blind hatred" by the Vatican [AP report]. Additionally, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights [official website] has previously expressed concern [JURIST report] over acts of ethnic violence by Boko Haram. Specifically, the Office called the group's August bombing of a UN building in Nigeria [VO report] "cowardly." At least 18 people were killed in the attack.




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


Botswana High Court strikes down male-dominated inheritance law system
Dan Taglioli on October 12, 2012 11:32 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The High Court [official website] of Botswana [JURIST news archive] on Friday struck down longstanding local customary laws that prevented women from inheriting their family home. Judge Key Dingake ruled that such laws are not in line with the Botswana constitution [AFP report], which guarantees gender equality. According to the legal rights group Southern Africa Litigation Centre [advocacy website], which supported the women plaintiffs, the five-year legal battle challenged an Ngwaketse customary law rule [BBC report] that allows for the youngest-born son to inherit the family home. By Tswana custom the family home is either inherited by the first-born or last-born son, depending on tribe. The plaintiffs in Mmusi v. Remantele [SALC case materials] are four sisters, all over 65 years old, who lived in the Mmusi family home about 50 miles south of Gaborone. Before dying their only brother left the home to his older half-brother, whose son later brought the present case to evict his aunts from the homestead. Arguing that the home was theirs by virtue of having contributed to its upkeep and expansion, Edith Mmusi and her sisters contested their 63-year-old nephew's claim in customary court in 2007, losing that challenge and the subsequent appeal. The sisters then turned to the civil courts, ultimately leading to the High Court's ruling striking down the customary law inheritance rules. SALC and other advocacy groups welcomed the ruling despite the position of the Botswana attorney general and the lower courts that undoing customary laws is damaging to the country's culture.

Inequality in inheritance laws has become a global focus, particularly regarding inheritance issues surrounding same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder]. In August a Minnesota trial court ruled that the state's Defense of Marriage Act [text] does not prohibit partners in same-sex couples from inheriting each other's assets, holding that while the Defense of Marriage Act bars same-sex couples from marrying, it does not prevent same-sex couples from having the same inheritance rights [JURIST report] as heterosexual couples. One year earlier Chilean President Sebastian Pinera [official profile, in Spanish] proposed legislation that would legalize same-sex civil unions [JURIST news archive], extending inheritance and social welfare rights to same-sex couples [JURIST report] and unmarried heterosexual couples. In May 2011 the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil [official website, in Portugese] unanimously recognized legal rights for partners in same-sex civil unions [JURIST report], entitling gay couples in "stable relationships" to rights to community property, alimony, health insurance and tax benefits, adoption and inheritance rights. In August 2010 Germany's Federal Constitutional Court [official website, in German] ruled that a portion of the tax code requiring same-sex partners in a civil unions to pay a larger inheritance tax than partners in opposite-sex marriages [JURIST report] is unconstitutional.




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


Sierra Leone war crimes court sentences four for contempt
Rebecca DiLeonardo on October 12, 2012 11:04 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The Special Court for the Sierra Leone (SCSL) [official website; JURIST news archive] on Friday sentenced [press release, PDF] four men to prison terms ranging from 18 months to 2 years on contempt charges stemming from allegations of witness tampering. Three of the men were convicted last month after a fourth suspect, Samuel Kargbo, plead guilty and testified for the prosecution. Santigie Borbor Kanu and Hassan Papa Bangura were convicted of two counts of "interfering with the administration of justice by offering a bribe to a witness" and for attempting to induce a witness who had given testimony before the special court to recant. Ibrahim Bazzy Kamara was convicted for attempting to induce a witness to recant testimony. The men have all been previously convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Their new prison terms will be added to their previous sentences.

The convictions in this case stem from indictments that were issued last year [JURIST report]. Kamara and Kanu had been convicted of war crimes by the SCSL in June 2007, and sentenced to at least 45 years in prison [JURIST reports]. With the recent conviction [JURIST report] of Charles Taylor, the SCSL has largely fulfilled its mission and will take steps to shut down. In November 2009, the SCSL handed over its detention facility [JURIST report] to the Sierra Leone Prison Service in a monumental step towards the court's resolution. The month before, eight men judged guilty of war crimes by the court were transferred [JURIST report] to Rwanda to serve out their terms. The SCSL was created in a joint endeavor by the government of Sierra Leone and the UN to provide a forum to try those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law, committed in Sierra Leone.




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


Federal appeals court rejects Ohio law discarding provisional ballots cast in wrong precinct
Rebecca DiLeonardo on October 12, 2012 10:25 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit [official website] on Thursday upheld [opinion, PDF] a preliminary injunction against an Ohio state election law adopted in 2006 that discards provisional ballots cast in the wrong precinct. Pursuant to the law, the provisional ballots were rejected even if the error was caused by a poll worker. More than 14,000 provisional ballots were discarded in Ohio in the 2008 elections as a result of this law. The court's decision upheld a lower court ruling [JURIST report] finding that the law should be blocked for the upcoming election. In its decision, the court found that the state law unfairly burdened Ohio voters: "The State would disqualify thousands of right place/wrong-precinct provisional ballots, where the voter's only mistake was relying on the poll-worker's precinct guidance. That path unjustifiably burdens these voters' fundamental right to vote."

Ohio Secretary of State Jon Husted [official website] is currently defending another Ohio voting requirement in federal court. He recently filed an emergency appeal [JURIST report] with the US Supreme Court seeking permission to close early voting three days prior to election day for everyone but overseas military personnel. Husted and Attorney General Mike DeWine [official website] filed the request seeking to stay an order by the Sixth Circuit which ruled that the early voting polls should remain open [opinion, PDF] for the three days leading up to election day. Voting rights [JURIST backgrounder] have become especially contentious in the run up to the November presidential election. A federal court on Wednesday upheld a South Carolina voter ID law, but ruled that the state could not enforce the law until 2013 [JURIST report] because of the short time left to implement it without discriminatory effects. A similar ruling was issued in Pennsylvania earlier this month. A judge for the Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court issued a preliminary injunction preventing the state's voter identification law from taking effect [JURIST report] for the upcoming presidential election, but allowed it to be implemented in future elections. There are now 32 US states [NCSL backgrounder] that require voters to present some form of ID at the polls, but the issue remains controversial.




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


Mexico Senate passes anti-money laundering bill
Dan Taglioli on October 12, 2012 10:02 AM ET

Photo source or description
[JURIST] Mexico's Senate [official website, in Spanish] gave final approval to a federal anti-money laundering law Thursday in the nation's latest effort to subdue the country's powerful drug cartels. Passed by the lower congressional house earlier this year, the legislation [text, PDF, in Spanish] was proposed two years ago by outgoing President Felipe Calderon [official website, in Spanish], a conservative who, after taking office in 2006, launched a military-led assault against drug cartels [AP report] that has seen tens of thousands of people killed. While Calderon's administration is credited with the capturing or killings of more than two-thirds of the country's most-wanted drug lords [LAT report], until now there has been little effort to attack the cartels' multi-billion dollar flow of illegally-obtained cash. The new law establishes a special prosecution unit for money launderers and puts restrictions and reporting requirements on large casino bets, overly-generous charitable donations and cash purchases of real estate, automobiles, jewelry and other assets. The bill carries a minimum penalty of five years in prison. It will now go to Calderon to be signed into law. Estimates have put the annual amount of money laundered in Mexico in the range of USD $10–50 billion.

Calderon has long supported the passage of money laundering legislation, which has finally passed just a month or so before he will leave office. Other legislation considered recently was a Calderon-introduced labor bill [JURIST report] that provides for a broad range of reforms to Mexico's labor market, seeking to improve the transparency of Mexico's trade unions and make labor regulations more flexible. The bill was passed by the lower house [JURIST report] last month in a bipartisan effort between Calderon's outgoing National Action Party (PAN) and the more liberal Institutional Revolution Party (PRI) [party websites, in Spanish] of incoming president Enrique Pena Nieto [campaign website]. As his first legislation president-elect Nieto has announced a set of proposed constitutional reforms [JURIST report] aimed at increasing government transparency. In August Mexico's Electoral Tribunal [official website, in Spanish] upheld Nieto's victory [JURIST report] after second-place candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador [campaign website, in Spanish] of the left-wing Partido de la Revolucion Democratica (PRD) [party website, in Spanish] challenged the election results in court [JURIST report], claiming that Nieto's campaign had purchased votes.




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