Ukraine's October election drew the focus of the international community in light of the ongoing trial prosecution of country's former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko [personal website; JURIST news archive]. In September, the head of the Council of Europe [official website] had advocated for free and fair parliamentary elections [JURIST report] in Ukraine as he condemned the imprisonment of Tymoshenko. In August the Ukrainian Supreme Court [official website, in Ukrainian] upheld [JURIST report] Tymoshenko's abuse of office conviction, reasoning that there would be no basis to rule in favor of the former prime minister and that the prison sentence is appropriate considering the charges against her. During the appeal the government denied allegations that the criminal proceedings against Tymoshenko were a measure initiated by Yanukovich to prevent her from participating in the October elections. The decision came only a day after the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] held a hearing [JURIST report] on Tymoshenko's appeal. During the same month, Ukrainian prosecutors urged the Supreme Court not to hear her appeal [JURIST report]. Prosecutors told the court that Tymoshenko's trial had already established her guilt in the case, and asked the judges to let stand a seven-year prison sentence [JURIST report] in the case. Tymoshenko was not present at the hearing due to health concerns. The hearing has been delayed [JURIST report] in the past due to Tymoshenko's absence. Yanukovich was narrowly elected [JURIST report] over Tymoshenko in 2010.

Same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder] recognition has been a contentious issue both internationally as well as within the US. Thus far in 2012 France, Germany and Scotland [JURIST reports] have all seen new efforts to get same-sex marriages recognized. In September an attempt by Australian legislators to legalize same-sex marriage was overwhelmingly voted down [JURIST report]. During the same month, the US Department of Justice [official website] asked the US Supreme Court to consider two more challenges [JURIST report] to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) [text], which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages. In July a lesbian couple filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the Central District of California [official website] in a DOMA challenge that seeks to achieve for gay and lesbian couples the same federal immigration rights afforded to heterosexual couples [JURIST report].

Tension between Bahrain's government and protesters has been on the rise since government forces clashed with protesters last year during pro-democracy demonstrations. Last month the Bahraini government banned all protests [JURIST report] via an emergency rule to stop the persistent anti-government protests [JURIST news archive] by threatening legal action against any groups that initiate demonstrations. In September, Bahrain pledged to follow the UN's plan [JURIST report] to improve the country's human rights conditions, but Human Rights Watch [advocacy website] raised doubts as to whether the government is fully committed to reform.

The Gaza blockade has been highly criticized by the international community. In July 50 aid groups and UN offices signed a joint statement urging Israel to end its blockade [JURIST report] of the Gaza Strip, calling it a violation of international law. Among the signatories were Amnesty International, the World Health Organization and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The joint statement followed a call by the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Valerie Amos to end the blockade [JURIST report], which she argued deprives Gaza residents of basic humanitarian needs. Human Rights Watch in February urged Israel [JURIST report] to change its policies that forbid Palestinians from traveling through and living in Gaza and the West Bank.

Any restrictions, control and censorship of the content disseminated via the Internet should be done on a clearly defined legal basis and in a manner that is necessary, proportionate and compatible with States' international human rights obligations including under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.

Internet restrictions have been subject to international controversy. Last week a controversial Russian Internet regulation law which gives the Russian government the ability to completely block access to certain websites went into effect [JURIST report]. The bill's stated purpose is to block access to child pornography and the encouragement of drug use or suicide. In July the UN Human Rights Council [official website] passed its first-ever resolution [JURIST report] to protect the free speech of individuals online. The resolution was approved by all 47 members of the council, including China and Cuba, who have been criticized for limiting Internet freedom. The resolution was written to guarantee Internet freedom, including the free flow of information and freedom of expression.

In October the Mannheim Regional Court in Germany ruled [JURIST report] for Motorola Mobility in a lawsuit against Microsoft. The patent at issue, EP1233343 [text], is for technology that allows applications to work with different mobile communication hardware and cellular networks. This allows the same application to work with different mobile phones. The court found that Motorola did not infringe Microsoft's patent. Motorola has been very active in German courts both seeking to protect and asserting its intellectual property. In September Apple [corporate website] won an injunction against Motorlola for infringing EP2126788 [JURIST report] which covered "rubber-banding" technology in scrolling lists. In July a German court granted an injunction for Microsoft against Motorola in a patent infringement case over EP0618540 [JURIST report] which involved technology relating to common names for long and short file allocation tables. Also in July a German court dismissed a patent infringement suit by Microsoft over EP1304891 [JURIST report] which monitors different functions on a smartphone and provides such information to other applications utilizing them. Another case that was brought by Microsoft against Motorola Mobility involving a patent on system input methods is postponed to September 20. In February Apple sued Motorola in the US District Court for the Southern District of California [official website] seeking an injunction [JURIST report] to stop Motorola from bringing patent claims against Apple in Germany, alleging that the German suit violates a licensing agreement between Motorola and Qualcomm.

The disputed national measures, pursuant to which the fact that a worker has reached the retirement age laid down by that legislation leads to automatic termination of his employment contract, must be regarded as directly imposing less favorable treatment of workers who have reached that age as compared with all other persons in the labor force. Such legislation therefore establishes a difference in treatment directly based on age.

In 2007, the ECJ upheld [JURIST report] mandatory retirement ages in the EU, saying that mandatory retirement policies do not violate the prohibition against age discrimination if the policy is intended to further the legitimate public interest of increasing employment and the retirees are provided with full pensions. The EU prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion, disability, age, and sexual orientation. Directive 2000/78/EC is intended to implement the principle of equal treatment and eliminate inequalities within the EU, but does not prohibit national governments from instituting retirement ages.

This is the latest development in the ongoing reproductive rights controversy [JURIST backgrounder], and Arizona has had two abortion regulations tested in the courts. Late last month the US District Court for the District of Arizona enjoined Arizona [JURIST report] from implementing a public funding law [HB 2800, PDF] that prohibits funding for health clinics that perform abortions. A Texas court upheld a similar law, while the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit enjoined an Indiana [JURIST reports] law last month. In addition to Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma [JURIST reports] have banned abortions in some form after 20-weeks.

The Court also heard arguments in Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds [transcript, PDF; JURIST report] about whether, in a misrepresentation case under Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 [text], the district court must require proof of materiality before certifying a plaintiff class based on the fraud-on-the-market theory and whether a defendant should be given the opportunity to rebut such presumption at the class certification stage. An attorney for Amgen Inc., a pharmaceutical company, argued that a false statement or misrepresentation is not an acceptable substitute for materiality.

[E]very one of the four predicates to the fraud-on-the-market theory, which is a shortcut that—that excuses plaintiffs from proving that I heard the statement and relied on it—every one of those predicates is common. Whether the market is efficient is common. Whether the statement is public is common. Whether the stocks were bought and sold during the period of market distortion is common. And materiality is common. ... The falsity of the statement is common, but it is not a predicate to whether or not you can prove reliance on a statement indirectly by relying on the integrity of the market price, because in an efficient market, material public statements, whether they are true or false, will presumably move the market price.