 |
|

Legal news from Tuesday, January 17, 2006 |
 |
|


SEC approves stricter executive pay disclosure rules
Joshua Pantesco on January 17, 2006 7:33 PM ET

[JURIST] The 5-member US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) [official website] voted unanimously [press release] Tuesday to support an overhaul of its rules governing how executive compensation packages are disclosed to investors, a top priority of Chairman Christopher Cox [official profile] since he assumed leadership of the regulatory body [JURIST report] last August. Read Cox's Tuesday remarks [text] unveiling the proposal. The proposed rules require all publicly-traded companies to disclose the true cost of the total compensation packages awarded to the chairman, chief financial officers, and the next three highest-paid executives of the company, to explain, in plain English, why executives deserve the level of pay they receive, and to report executive retirement benefits. The Business Roundtable [advocacy website], an interest group representing many Fortune 500 CEO's, supports the proposal [press release], but has cautioned that companies should be prevented from inflating the value of stock options disclosed to investors and should not be forced to reveal strategic information relating to future business goals. The SEC can officially adopt the new rules following a mandatory 60-day public comment period. Watch recorded video [RealPlayer] of Tuesday's SEC open meeting. AP has more.


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

|

UK anti-terror proposal suffers setback in House of Lords
Andrew Wood on January 17, 2006 3:00 PM ET

[JURIST] The UK Terrorism Bill proposal [text], introduced following last year's July 7 London bombings, suffered two defeats Tuesday in the House of Lords [official website] as peers voted against introducing a "glorification" of terrorism offense and called for more safeguards for provisions that would outlaw the spreading of terrorist publications. Prime Minister Tony Blair has already faced one major setback on the anti-terror proposal when members of parliament in the House of Commons voted last November to reduce the proposed detention period [JURIST report] for suspected terrorists from 90 to 28 days. The bill proposed outlawing the "glorification of terrorism" as part of the more general "indirect encouragement of terrorism" offense. "Glorification" would apply to those acting recklessly or intentionally and require those hearing glorification to believe they were being encouraged to carry out terrorist acts. Peers voted 270-144 to scrap the proposal, with critics calling it unworkable and "not sufficiently legally certain." Plans to outlaw the spreading of terrorism publication were also defeated, with opponents of the plans fearing that academics, librarians, and shopkeepers would be left open to prosecution. Last week, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour [official profile] criticized the proposed bill [JURIST report], including provisions that would outlaw the glorification of terrorism and the dissemination of terrorism-related publications, pointing to human rights concerns, though the government dismissed Arbour's concerns as "unjustified". BBC News has more.


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

|

Saddam trial judges disagree over choice of new chief judge
Krystal MacIntyre on January 17, 2006 12:24 PM ET

[JURIST] Judges on the Iraqi High Criminal Court (formerly, the Iraqi Special Tribunal [official website]), the court trying Saddam Hussein [JURIST news archive], are in disagreement over how to choose a new chief judge to replace Rizgar Amin [Wikipedia profile]. Amin resigned last week [JURIST report] in protest of criticism surrounding his handling of the trial, and was replaced temporarily [JURIST report] by colleague Sayeed al-Hamashi. The court administration wants to appoint al-Hamashi as permanent chief judge, but some of the 14 judges on the 15-judge panel feel that the administration does not have the right to appoint a new chief judge, saying that court's governing statute [PDF text] clearly states that the new chief judge should be elected by the other judges in the tribunal. The disagreement further fuels doubts of some human rights groups as to whether Iraq is capable of hosting a fair trial for Hussein and his seven co-defendants, charged [JURIST report] in connection with the 1982 massacre of 143 Shiites in Dujail. Meanwhile Tuesday, Iraqi President Jalal Talabani [BBC profile] suggested that security concerns surrounding the proceedings would be alleviated if the trial were moved from Baghdad to Kurdistan [Reuters report]. Talabani, who is from the Kurdish region, told reporters Tuesday that judges would be safe there and "guarded very well." Two defense lawyers have been killed and there has been an assassination attempt [JURIST report] on an investigative judge since the trial began last year. Reuters has more.
Previously in JURIST's Paper Chase...


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

|

Putin signs law limiting foreign NGOs
Krystal MacIntyre on January 17, 2006 11:52 AM ET

[JURIST] Russia's official newspaper, Rossiskaya Gazeta [media website] reported Tuesday that Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed a law [AP report] granting tighter state control over non-governmental organizations, including those foreign-based, though there has been no official announcement from the Kremlin. The law, approved by parliament [JURIST report] last week, has been widely criticized [JURIST report], but its supporters defend the measure as necessary to prevent foreign governments and organizations from using NGOs to undermine Russia's security. Reports that Putin has signed the legislation come the same day that a Russian regional high court ordered two foreign NGOs, the UK-based Centre for Peacemaking and Community Development and German group Help [advocacy websites], to halt their work providing aid to Chechen refugees in Ingushetia [government website, in Russian]. The Ingush Supreme Court ruled that the two groups did not have proper authorization. BBC News has more.


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

|

Lawsuits filed over NSA domestic wiretaps
Krystal MacIntyre on January 17, 2006 11:11 AM ET

[JURIST] A coalition of civil rights groups, led by the American Civil Liberties Union, filed a lawsuit [ACLU complaint, PDF; press release] Tuesday challenging the Bush administration's warrantless domestic spying program [JURIST news archive]. In the ACLU lawsuit [fact sheet; additional materials] the plaintiffs are seeking a declaration that the NSA program, which authorizes warrantless wiretaps on international communications originating in the US, is unconstitutional under the First and Fourth Amendments and a permanent injunction barring the NSA from continuing the program. A separate lawsuit [CCR complaint, PDF; press release] was also filed Tuesday by the Center for Constitutional Rights. The CCR lawsuit alleges that privileged attorney-client communications were intercepted by the National Security Agency [official website] and also seeks a declaration that the program is unconstitutional. The two lawsuits, the first major challenges to the program since it was made public [JURIST report] in December, come the day after former Vice President Al Gore accused President Bush of repeatedly breaking the law [JURIST report] by authorizing the wiretaps. The administration has repeatedly defended the legality of the program [JURIST document] and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told [transcript] CNN's Larry King Monday that "this program from its inception has been carefully reviewed by lawyers throughout the administration, people who are experienced in this area of the law, experienced regarding this technology and we believe the president does have legal authorities to authorize this program." It is expected that the administration will oppose the lawsuits on national security grounds. The New York Times has more.


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

|

California executes oldest inmate on death row
Kate Heneroty on January 17, 2006 8:43 AM ET

[JURIST] California executed 76-year old Clarence Ray Allen [advocacy backgrounder, PDF] Tuesday morning, despite protests that executing the ailing inmate was cruel and unusual punishment. Allen, who was blind, nearly deaf and confined to a wheelchair, was California's oldest death row inmate and the second-oldest person executed in the US since the death penalty [JURIST news archive] was reinstated in 1976. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger denied clemency [press release; statement of decision, PDF] Friday, saying "Allen's crimes are the most dangerous sort because they attack the justice system itself." Allen was sentenced to death in 1982 for hiring a hit man to kill witnesses who testified against him in an earlier murder trial. The US Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the execution [order, PDF], though Justice Breyer dissented, saying that the circumstances raised "a significant question as to whether his execution would constitute 'cruel and unusual punishment.'" Last month, California sparked a death penalty debate [JURIST report] with the highly publicized execution of Crips gang co-founder and convicted murderer Stanley Tookie Williams [advocacy website]. The Los Angeles Times has local coverage. AP has more.


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

|

FBI questioned legality of post-Sept. 11 NSA surveillance
Kate Heneroty on January 17, 2006 8:11 AM ET

[JURIST] In the months following Sept. 11, the National Security Agency [official website] provided a "flood" of surveillance [JURIST news archive] information to the FBI, most of which proved to be worthless and a waste of FBI resources, and which prompted FBI doubts about the legality of the NSA's increasing role in domestic intelligence, the New York Times reported Tuesday. The NSA gathered the bulk of its information, including phone numbers, e-mail addresses and names of suspected terrorists, through warrantless wiretaps on Americans' international communications. FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III [official profile] probed administration officials concerning "whether the program had a proper legal foundation," but eventually deferred to reassurances by the Justice Department. The Times report cited more than a dozen current and former counterterrorism officials who questioned the sources of the collected information, raising questions of "pointless intrusions" on the privacy of Americans. Some FBI officials expressed unease with the NSA's increasing role in domestic intelligence, citing their lack of training in safeguarding American privacy and civil liberties. Reuters has more.


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

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