Recently, adoption rights of same-sex couples have created controversy in several courts worldwide. Earlier this week the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) [official website] ruled that a woman in a same-sex relationship could adopt her partner's biological child [JURIST report]. The court ruled the ban violated Articles 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights [text, PDF]. Also this week the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany ruled that same-sex couples in a civil union can legally adopt [JURIST report] the non-biological children of their partners. Similarly, the Northern Ireland High Court [official website] held [JURIST report] in October that a law permitting adoption only by heterosexual married couples or single individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation, is unlawful. Also in October, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals [official website] upheld a law limiting marriage as a union between and one man and one woman. That ruling effectively barred a woman from adopting her female partner's child.

The new legislation was drafted after Germany's Federal Constitutional Court [official website, in German] struck down the previous election law [JURIST report] in July for violating the constitutional guarantee of direct, free and equal elections. The previous election law worked to strengthen already large parties in parliament. However, the ruling Christian Democrats (CDU) [party website, in German] party of Chancellor Angela Merkel [BBC profile] is expected to remain the strongest force in parliament.

We believe that the President is subject to personal criminal responsibility for these crimes in accordance with the principle of chain of command in light of his position as head of the Supreme Council for the police. Proceeding from this responsibility it is imperative to take immediate action to stop these crimes and to hold those responsible for their commission.

Egypt has been plagued by continuing protests and violence since the 2011 Egyptian Revolution [JURIST backgrounder]. Last week the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights criticized [JURIST report] Egypt's draft law on demonstrations for failure to adequately protect freedom of assembly. The draft law requires that organizers inform authorities about protest plans in advance and allows the interior ministry the right to reject demonstrations. In late January the UN High Commission for Human Rights voiced concern [JURIST report] over the growing violence and rising death toll in Egypt stemming form ongoing protest throughout the country. On January 28, 2013 President Mohamed Morsi declared a state of emergency [JURIST report] in an attempt to quell growing unrest and violent political protests in several cities.

The issue of same-sex marriage [JURIST backgrounder] is an ongoing controversy in the US. Last month the Supreme Court received briefs in two separate cases defending the constitutionality [JURIST report] of both Proposition 8 and Section 3 of DOMA. The court granted certiorari [JURIST report] in both cases in December. In early December, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire certified the results of Referendum 74 [JURIST report] which legalized same-sex marriage in the state. In the same time frame, the Coalition for the Protection of Marriage, a non-profit corporation in Nevada which opposes same-sex marriage, petitioned the US Supreme Court [JURIST report] to grant certiorari to determine whether the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause requires Nevada to change its definition of marriage from the union of a man and a woman to the union of two persons. In November, the office of the Maryland Attorney General released an opinion [JURIST report] stating that same-sex couples can obtain marriage licenses, allowing Maryland to become the ninth US state to allow same sex marriage after Maine and Washington [JURIST reports] enacted similar measures in November.

Earlier this month Amnesty International and the Open Society Justice Initiative [advocacy websites] urged Haiti to ensure that Duvalier is brought to justice [JURIST report]. Last February the US State Department [official website] dispatched [JURIST report] a team of international law experts to Haiti to assess how the country could reinforce the power and independence of its judiciary. That same month, UN Independent Experty Micael Forst said that Haiti is making significant progress [JURIST report] with the respect to the rule of law, citing improvements such as the establishment of judicial offices and the adoption of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights [text, PDF].

As lawyers, we have a responsibility to do all we possibly can to help preserve the integrity of the justice system and restore public confidence in our judiciary. The many distinguished and honorable judges in Pennsylvania deserve nothing less. An independent and impartial judiciary is a cornerstone of our system of justice, and public confidence in the judiciary is undermined when judges engage in high profile misconduct, such as by directing their law clerks and staff to perform political campaign work when they should be doing the important business of the court.

Judicial corruption is a threat worldwide. Last month retired Michigan Supreme Court justice Diane Hathaway pleaded guilty to felony bank fraud [JURIST report]. The charges arose from Hathaway deeding her home in Florida to a relative while negotiating a short sale on the home, resulting in a $600,000 debt they owed to their bank being erased. In October the UN called on nations around the world to do more to combat judicial corruption [JURIST report], stating that it is a human rights issue because it can deprive people of their due process rights. It also said keeping the judiciary free from corruption is critical to "strengthen judicial credibility and independence."

Salim Ayyash, Mustafa Badreddine, Hussein Oneissi and Assad Sabra [STL profiles] are charged in absentia with involvement in a 2005 truck bombing that killed Hariri and 20 others. In July the STL confirmed its jurisdiction [JURIST] over the trials of the alleged assassins. Earlier that month the STL upheld [JURIST report] the decision to try the four accused in absentia. The tribunal rejected a defense motion challenging the legality and jurisdiction over the case. The STL could not find any error of legal reasoning in the February 2012 decision that could lead to unjust treatment of the four accused. In February 2012 the STL granted [JURIST report] the prosecution's office permission to proceed with the case against the four accused assassins. The court reasoned that the prosecution and the national authorities have undertaken all reasonable steps to apprehend and inform the accused. In August 2011 the STL announced [JURIST report] that it would investigate three additional bombings that is believed to be connected to the February 2005 bomb attack. Two days earlier, the UN-backed tribunal unsealed [JURIST report] the indictment against the accused assassins after a pre-trial judge confirmed the indictment and ordered the lift of confidentiality. In June 2011 the STL released [JURIST report] the indictment along with an arrest warrant against the accused to local authorities.

All officials need to act in accordance with human rights law if security and law and order are to be restored to areas recently recovered by the government. This means providing basic due process rights for anyone taken into custody, and making sure they are treated humanely. Commanders who fail to stop abuses by their troops can themselves be prosecuted.

The Malian government allegedly denies knowledge of these acts of violence targeting particular ethnic groups amidst scrutiny from international sources. Last week the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights [official website] confirmed sending a four-person team to investigate [JURIST report] the claims of violence. International Criminal Court (ICC) [official website] Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda [official profile] has also announced an investigation [JURIST report] into possible war crimes. A request [JURIST report] for an ICC investigation came last July from six West African nations.

The procedures and policies regarding the 9/11 [JURIST backgrounder] military commission hearings have faced significant scrutiny. Last week lawyers for the US Navy contended [JURIST report] that surveillance equipment deployed throughout the Guantanamo Bay detention center was not used to breach attorney-client privilege. Earlier this month a military judge ordered the removal [JURIST report] of any monitoring system that censors the public broadcast of the hearings. In September, a federal judge rejected [JURIST report] new restrictions on the ability of lawyers representing detainees who have had their habeas corpus challenges denied or dismissed to access their clients. In February 2012 the chief US military tribunal judge ruled [JURIST report] that the content of attorney-client mail inspected at the Guantanamo Bay prison is confidential and may not be released.

The inescapable fact is that s 5 [of the Sex Discrimination Act] defines sex discrimination in a manner which depends on a comparison between the treatment of the person of one sex with the treatment of a person of the opposite sex. In the present case, the alleged discriminatory treatment results from the fact that the relevant agencies of the State can register a "marriage" which is defined by s 5(1) of the Marriage Act 1961 [text], ... as the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life. It follows that the union of a man and a man or a woman and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life, is not a "marriage" as defined in the Marriage Act and cannot be registered by the State agencies as a marriage. In the terms of s 5 there cannot be discrimination by reason of the sex of a person because in all cases the treatment of the person of the opposite sex is the same. Hence, a man cannot enter into the state of marriage as defined with another man just as a woman cannot enter into the state of marriage with another woman as defined. ... The redress for these circumstances lies in the political and not the legal arena because what would be required is a change to the definition of "marriage" in s 5(1) of the Marriage Act.

Same-sex marriage remains a controversial issue around the world. Earlier this month lawmakers in both France and the UK [JURIST reports] approved bills that would legalize same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage is currently recognized in nine US states and the District of Columbia, and lawmakers in Illinois and Rhode Island [JURIST report] have recently given approval to same-sex marriage legislation. In December Uruguay's lower house of parliament approved a same-sex marriage bill that would make Uruguay only the second Latin American country to allow same-sex marriage, following Argentina [JURIST reports]. Same-sex marriage has been legal in Mexico City since 2009, and last year the Supreme Court of Mexico struck down [JURIST reports] Oaxaca's same-sex marriage ban, which could pave the way for legalization across the country.

Though Beebe has yet to comment on his plans regarding this bill, he has said that he would veto an earlier bill [SB 134, PDF] banning all abortions after the detection of a fetal heartbeat [JURIST report]. This bill has failed to garner enough votes to pass the House. The current proposed legislation would make Arkansas the eighth US state to ban or restrict abortions after 20 weeks. Similar laws are currently facing legal challenges in Arizona and Georgia [JURIST reports].

President Peña Nieto has inherited one of worst crises of disappearances in the history of Latin America. While his administration has announced some important measures to assist victims, it has yet to take the steps necessary to ensure that those responsible for these horrific crimes are brought to justice.

This is not the first time the security forces have been accused of committing rights abuses, most of which have been committed in response to the crackdown on illegal drugs. The Trans-Border Institute at the University of San Diego (TBI) [official website] in July reported that that Mexican military forces have been committing human rights violations with impunity [JURIST report]. HRW reported in November 2011 that Mexican security forces had committed widespread rights abuses [JURIST report], such as torture and forced disappearances, in combating organized crime. In August 2011, Mexico's National Human Rights Commission [official website, in Spanish] issued a report [text, PDF, in Spanish] contending that military and law enforcement officials routinely conducted illegal searches [JURIST report]. Mexico has struggled to combat the drug cartels' influence on the government and the country as a whole. There have been more than 27,000 drug-related deaths [STRATFOR report] since 2006. In 2008, a former Assistant Attorney General was arrested for receiving bribes and Mexico's prosecutor's office admitted that it had been infiltrated [JURIST reports] by the drug cartels.