Tuesday, 22 April 2014

Stakeholders Canvass for Legal Framework on Building Code

B0511212-Housing-Estate.jpg - B0511212-Housing-Estate.jpg
Stakeholders in the building and construction sector of the economy have urged the federal government to provide a legal framework for the National Building Code which had existed since 2006 without a legal backing.
They insisted that such a legal instrument would restore sanity and safety in the building industry which had recently been charactrised by the incessant incidence of building collapse that had become an embarrassment to government.
In a communique issued at the end of the second Lafarge National dialogue series themed:" Building Collapse: An Assessment of Building Practices in Nigeria and the Imperative for Sustainable Construction" in Abuja, the stakeholders demanded that the building code be sent without further delay to the National Assembly for consideration and passage.
Participants were also unanimous that though incidents of building collapse remained a major challenge, there is no connection in anyway with the quality of cement.
The communique expressed regrets that building collapse had persisted despite the sustained efforts by various professional bodies in the industry and called on the  various tiers of government to tame the trend.
It said: "Incidents of building collapse have remained prevalent despite continued efforts by various concerns and professional bodies in the building industry and at various tiers of government. Professionals are unanimous that cement is not responsible for building collapse and identify issues such as faulty designs, sharp practices, non-involvement of professionals in building projects, over-loading due to change in initial building plans amongst others for economic gains as contributory factors to building collapse."
It added: "The National Building Code should be forwarded without further delay to the National Assembly for consideration and passage to achieve the desired sanity and safety in the building industry."
It further recommended that the research institute should develop effective substitute to cement to make more choice available to consumers.
The stakeholders also want building professionals strengthened in their effort at stamping out non-professionals from supervising building projects while manufacturers of building materials should adhere strictly to global standards.
They also called for the prosecution of perpetrators of acts of negligence resulting in building collapse from the side of the contractors, consultants and suppliers as a way of addressing the menace.
It argued: "There is no sub standard cement produced in the country as the 32.5 strength manufactured by the cement manufacturers is of world standard. Construction standards should be institutionalised through introduction of courses on standards in the universities and other higher institutions of learning in the country."

FCTA Obeys Court Verdict, Suspends Park and Pay Scheme

The Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) has announced the suspension of its on-street park and pay scheme in Abuja with immediate effect.
This was announced yesterday in a statement signed by the Special Assistant on Media to the FCT Minister, Mr. Nosike Ogbuenyi.
Ogbuenyi said the suspension was in compliance with the judgment of an FCT High Court last Thursday, declaring the system illegal.
According to him, the Secretary of Transportation of the FCTA, Mr. Jonathan Ivoke, had already dispatched a letter to the operators of the scheme informing them of the suspension.
He reminded that the scheme was conceived and launched by the FCTA for the purpose of effective traffic management and control in the nation's capital city especially against the backdrop of its fast growth in vehicular population.
He said: "The introduction of the scheme is in sync with the standard practice in many mega cities around the world.
"However, while the scheme has been widely hailed for helping to bring about orderliness, sanity, beauty and reduction in auto crashes on FCT roads and streets, some persons and groups opposed to the new order have launched ferocious attacks against it especially through the institution of several legal actions challenging its legal status."
Judgment of Justice Peter Affen of an Abuja High Court which had declared the scheme illegal was  the culmination of the attacks launched against the new system by some aggrieved members of the public. .
Ogbuenyi however noted that the court in delivering the judgment rated the scheme as an excellent policy but only faulted it on the grounds that there was no valid legislation backing it.
He said as a law abiding organisation that strongly believes in the rule of law, the FCTA had decided to comply with the judgment of the court.
By this decision, he stated, all the operators licensed by the FCTA had been directed to immediately suspend the operation of the scheme to give full effect to the judgment.
Ogbuenyi added that  FCTA had set in motion the process for a review of the FCT Road Transport Regulation, 2005 to address the legal lacuna and to properly capture the on-street park and pay scheme including the incorporation of the extensive review already started by the administration.
"The review is expected to address perceived loopholes in the scheme," he said.
Meanwhile,  the FCTA has absolved the FCT Minister, Senator Bala Mohammed, of involvement in the award and execution of the Close Circuit Television (CCTV) project in Abuja.
The Special Assistant on Media to the minister, Nosike Ogbuenyi, in a statement issued yesterday,  said the CCTV contract was neither awarded nor executed by the FCTA.
Ogbuenyi condemned what he described as an unwarranted and misguided attack on Mohammed by the Executive Chairman of a self-styled Coalition against Corrupt Leaders (CACOL), Debo Adeniran, over the $470million (N76billion) National Public Security Communications System Project in Abuja otherwise known as the CCTV Project.
The statement was a response to a story published in one of the dailies yesterday in which Adeniran was reported to have called for the prosecution of the FCT minister in connection with the Abuja CCTV contract.
“We regard that unguarded outburst by Adeniran as a shameful advertisement of ignorance not just on the part of the man himself but also the organisation that he purports to lead.
"While the FCTA has been doing a lot to enhance security of lives and property in the FCT and is ever ready to collaborate with any person, institution, ministry, commission or group committed to the same objective, the fact needs to be stressed that the Abuja CCTV project was never a baby of the FCTA by conception, execution or supervision," the minister's spokesman clarified.
Ogbuenyi therefore called on CACOL and its Executive Chairman,  to render an unreserved apology to the FCT minister for wrongful accusation and defamation.
He stated: “If those calling for FCT Minister’s prosecution on account of a CCTV contract that he neither originated nor executed are not comprehensive illiterates, they should have been able to at least carry out preliminary internet research on the project to ascertain those that awarded and executed the contract.”
The minister's aid advised CACOL and its leaders to henceforth endeavour to carry out proper investigation of issues before making public pronouncements on them in order to avoid ridiculing itself and embarrassing innocent persons and institutions.
He however, described the CCTV project as an important scheme in the estimation of the FCTA and enjoined those responsible for the installation, completion and operation of the vital security devices to do the needful thing to make them fully operational.

Prison doctor fired after Kentucky inmate starves to death

Kentucky State Penitentiary
A prison doctor has been fired and two staffers are in the midst of being dismissed after an inmate at the Kentucky State Penitentiary starved himself to death ina case that has exposed lapses in medical treatment and in how hunger strikes are handled at the facility. Prison officials have asked prosecutors to investigate after the Associated Press began asking questions about the inmate's death.
James Kenneth Embry, 57 and with just three years left on a nine-year sentence for drug offenses, began to spiral out of control in the spring of 2013, after he stopped taking anti-anxiety medication. Seven months later, in December, after weeks of erratic behavior – from telling prison staff he felt anxious and paranoid to banging his head on his cell door – Embry refused most of his meals. By the time of his death in January 2014, he had shed more than 30lb on his 6ft frame and died weighing just 138lb, according to documents reviewed by the AP.
An internal investigation determined that medical personnel failed to provide anti-anxiety medication that may have kept his suicidal thoughts at bay and didn't take steps to check on him as his condition worsened. The internal review of Embry's death also exposed broader problems involving the treatment of inmates – including a failure to regularly check inmates on medical rounds and communication lapses among medical staff.
The AP, tipped off to Embry's death, obtained scores of documents under Kentucky's Open Records Act, including a report detailing the investigation into Embry's death, an autopsy report and personnel files. Along with interviews with corrections officials and correspondence with inmates, the documents describe Embry's increasingly paranoid behavior until his death and the numerous opportunities for various prison staff to have intervened.
"It's just very, very, very disturbing," said Greg Belzley, a Louisville, Kentucky attorney who specialises in inmate rights litigation and reviewed some of the documents obtained by the AP. "How do you just watch a man starve to death?"
According to the report of the internal investigation, Embry stopped taking medications for anxiety in May 2013. Seven months later, he told the lead prison psychologist, Jean Hinkebein, on 3 December that he felt anxious and paranoid and wanted to restart those medications. But the psychologist concluded Embry didn't have any significant mental health issues, even though Embry repeatedly talked about wanting to hurt himself. Hinkebein and an associate considered his comments vague, and his request for medication was denied.
Seven days later, Embry began banging his head on his cell door and was moved to an observation cell where he refused meals and told the prison psychologist: "I don't have any hope."
He soon began refusing most food, though he drank tea on occasion while continuing to make threats to hurt himself in the ensuing weeks.
A nurse checked on Embry on 4 January, finding him weak and shaky, and advised him to resume eating. Embry responded that it had been too long for him to start taking food again. Nine days later, on the day he died, an advanced practice registered nurse named Bob Wilkinson refused a request from other medical staffers to move Embry to the infirmary at 11.51am and said the inmate should be taken off a hunger strike watch, according to the internal investigative report. Guards found Embry unresponsive in his cell hours later, his head slumped to the side. He was pronounced dead at 5.29pm.
Lyon County coroner Ronnie Patton classified Embry's death as a suicide and listed dehydration as the primary cause of death, with starvation and several other medical ailments as secondary causes.
The documents obtained by the AP show a prison system with a dated protocol for handling hunger strikes, staff who weren't familiar with its provisions, and others who said they were told not to follow them. In Embry's case, those in charge of his well-being were simply counting on him to cave in and start eating again on his own, the records show.
On 16 January, three days after Embry's death, Steve Hiland, the lead physician at the maximum-security prison, signed off on a nurse's note about Embry consistently refusing food and being taken off of the hunger-strike watch because he drank tea. During the internal investigation, Hiland said he believed a hunger strike consisted of missing "six or eight meals" and ended when the inmate ate or drank anything at all.
In a revealing exchange, investigators asked Hiland how he thought inmates were supposed to be removed from a hunger strike. Hiland told them that prison staff "usually don't have to worry about it because they [the inmates] eventually give up."
James Kenneth Embry
James Kenneth Embry died on 13 January. Photograph: uncredited/AP
When Embry stopped eating regularly, the Corrections Department's existing guidelines recommended multiple checks of the inmate's vital signs three times a week, repeated visits with a physician and ongoing evaluations by a psychologist.
Medical staff would later tell internal investigators they were either unfamiliar with the protocols for handling a hunger strike or that Hiland and Wilkinson forbade those procedures from being used. There is no mention of whether anyone considered force-feeding the inmate.
Corrections investigators determined Embry continued to refuse most food, though he drank tea on occasion while continuing to make threats to hurt himself in the ensuing weeks. Investigators concluded that Embry refused 35 of 36 meals before his death.
The state has placed Hinkebein, who is also in private practice in Central City, Kentucky, on administrative leave, and said it is in the process of firing her and her associate. Hinkebein declined to comment, saying she was still a state employee.
The internal investigation found that Hiland and Wilkinson didn't check on inmates as they should have during routine visits. The report also documented multiple communication problems among medical staff and allegations that other nurses were intimidated by Wilkinson, a contract staffer who works for Nashville, Tennessee-based Correct Care Solutions.
Phone and email messages left with the company seeking comment from managers there and from Wilkinson were not returned.
Embry, a heating and air conditioning repairman by trade, had no family or friends visit him at the prison, and no one claimed his remains. He is buried in a potter's field near the penitentiary.

Future of 9/11 tribunal unclear after rocky week of hearings at Guantánamo

Guantanamo court sketch
The major fissure concerning the controversial military commissions at Guantánamo Bay is no longer between civil liberties and national security. It’s between the commissions and the intelligence services, with the future of the 9/11 war crimes tribunal hanging in the balance.
On one side are both the commission prosecutors and defense attorneys, all of whom grapple in different ways with bringing justice to defendants who spent years in the brutal black box that was CIA custody. The prosecution in particular is laboring to send the message that, after years of stop-and-start proceedings, the commissions are now a viable, professional complement to federal courts.
On the other side are the CIA and the FBI, which have gone to extraordinary lengths to prevent information about the detainees – particularly about their torture in CIA custody – becoming public. The intelligence and law enforcement agencies’ equities at Guantánamo, at a minimum, conflict with the successful military prosecution of the detainees. At worst, they undermine the venue meant to provide a final dispensation for alleged post-9/11 war crimes.
And the agencies may now have overplayed their hand.
Last week, defense attorneys for 9/11 co-defendant Ramzi bin al-Shibh revealed that the FBI surreptitiously compelled a classification specialist assigned to them to sign documents indicating he would inform on the defense teams.
The revelation crowded out the pre-trial hearings scheduled to take place last week. The judge in the case, Army Colonel James Pohl, isslowly unfolding his own inquiry into whether the FBI is investigating the commissions’ defense attorneys, seemingly over the release of an unclassified manifesto by accused 9/11 architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
Barring unforeseen events – and, admittedly, the military tribunals have been nothing if not a series of unforeseen events – when the 9/11 military commissions resume in June, it will not be to clear through the thicket of motions that must be resolved before an actual trial can commence, but to examine the extent of the FBI’s penetration of the defense counsel. One of the defense lawyers in the case doubts the trial will get under way by 2016.
The apparent investigation into Mohammed’s defense attorneys was only the latest example of intelligence or law enforcement agencies asserting their prerogatives over the 9/11 tribunal. Last year, the CIA remotely muted the courtroom when a lawyer for Mohammed attempted to discuss conditions at the agency’s now-shuttered secret prisons. The agency’s ability to mute the proceedings was a surprise to Pohl, who issued acease-and-desist order.
Additionally, rooms used by the 9/11 defense lawyers for discussions with clients featured listening devices disguised as smoke detectors, confirming years of suspicion on the part of the defense that their conversations were under surveillance. The culprit was the FBI. Furthermore, the defense teams have faced a huge breach of their email data, which the Pentagon says was inadvertent.
“At this rate, it looks less and less likely that the 9/11 defendants will ever be brought to trial,” the Miami Herald editorialized.
If and whenever the trial commences, surreptitious surveillance of the defense and interference with the proceedings may also jeopardize any convictions or sentences obtained, according to legal observers.
“If the allegations are true, the FBI’s tapping of a member of the defense team for information on the defense’s case, something unimaginable in federal court proceedings, could conceivably lead to the defense asking for a mistrial,” said Karen Greenberg of Fordham University Law School.
“But as the trial isn’t yet under way, and mistrials assume that the trial is under way, it is more likely that you would get a request for dismissal based on outrageous government conduct.”
The prosecution is attempting to press on. A lawyer added to the team specifically to address the FBI issue owes Pohl a filing by the end of Monday responding to the defense’s assertions. The chief prosecutor, Army Brigadier General Mark Martins, insists he can proceed to jury empanelment by year’s end, despite the mounting complications caused by the intervention of the FBI and CIA.
And the biggest clash between the CIA and the commissions is just beginning to unfold.
Last week, in a different case, Pohl ordered the CIA to produce, through the prosecution, specific information about what the agency’s secret, torturous detentions after 9/11 actually meant in practice. As Pohl is also the judge in the 9/11 tribunal, the 9/11 attorneys promptly vowed to use Pohl’s ruling as a precedent to force the CIA to turn over similar information in their case.
The CIA must now decide whether it will co-operate and provide information that it has fought strenuously for over a decade to keep secret or if it will resist a judge’s order and jeopardize the prosecution of the 9/11 defendants. And it must make the choice while facing the partial public disclosure of a Senate inquiry into its post-9/11 renditions, detentions and interrogations.
Last week’s courtroom events may have made the intelligence agencies’ role in the tribunal more stark, but they have hung over the tribunal like a shadow. Were it not for the treatment the 9/11 defendants suffered in CIA custody, the tribunal would likely have concluded by now, as a large swath of their attorneys’ pretrial motions concerns establishing the extent of their pre-trial incarceration and its legal implications.
The intelligence value the CIA reaped from torture was minimal, according to senators who investigated it. The impact on the only legal proceedings designed to bring a semblance of closure to 9/11 may be far greater.

Egypt: the world watches as journalism goes on trial

Australian journalist Peter Greste of Al-Jazeera and his colleagues stand inside the defendants cage during their trial.
The continued detention of Australian Peter Greste and his colleagues sends a message to all journalists working in Egypt: 'no one is safe'

In just a few hours, Australian journalist Peter Greste and his colleagues are due to face court in Cairo, charged under terrorism offences for a crime that normally warrants praise, not a lengthy prison sentence.
The last time we saw Greste and his co-defendants was two weeks ago on 10 April. Greste, 48, has been detained since 29 December last year, along with Canadian-Egyptian Mohamed Fahmy and Egyptian Baher Mohamed. The three journalists have been under trial for charges of “fabricating false news”, “supporting the Muslim Brotherhood” and “defaming Egypt internationally”.
Handcuffed, Greste entered the courtroom iron cage, his hands tied with his co-defendants. I watched intently as Fahmy shouted to the judge “the handcuff!” raising his arm up, upon which the presiding judge ordered police to free their hands.
During the session Greste watched an Egyptian judge puzzled by the contents of his backpack: a USB flash drive and a wireless USB. The judge asked the “expert”, a police officer, to show the contents of the flash drive. It contained two videos: some video footage from Kenya and a BBC documentary on Somalia presented by Greste. Greste’s lawyer objected that the videos were irrelevant to the case, as they were shot outside Egypt.
Greste and the two other journalists could face anything from three years to a life sentence. Local and international human rights NGOs have described the trial as “politically motivated". As Salil Shetty, secretary general of Amnesty International, said: “The [trial] sends the chilling message that only one narrative is acceptable in Egypt today - that which is sanctioned by the Egyptian authorities.”
Before the trial started, Khaled Mohamed Abdel Raouf, a student in the same case, told the judge he had been on hunger strike for 15 days due to a lack of medical care. The judge said he would look into it, but 15 minutes later the young man fainted in the cage and was taken outside to be seen by a doctor.
One defense lawyer attempted to strike a chord with nationalist sentiments he assumed the judges would be sensitive to. He screamed at the court “the trial is very harmful to Egypt’s image abroad. This trial is not for a terrorist channel (referring to Al Jazeera) but against Egyptian educated and cultured and patriotic youth”.
At the end of the session, the court’s three judges withdrew to discuss the court’s decision. During that time, Fahmy shouted across the courtroom from his cage “innocence is not enough … if we are not released this is a politicised judge. I want a visit by Amnesty International and the ICRC”. As a line of policemen separated the cage with a buffer zone, I shouted back “I am attending on behalf of Amnesty International and I will follow up on your request”. Some international reporters also shouted questions to the defendants about their health and treatment and what they expect today from the court. Greste remained quiet.
The judges returned about 20 minutes later to the courtroom to adjourn the trial to 22 April so that other videos (which could not be shown with the equipment in the court, according to the expert) could be examined by an "expert committee".
Again, the Egyptian authorities failed to show how the journalists and the students in the case represent a threat to Egypt. The court seems intent on simply prolonging their detention.
Greste’s case comes at a time of obvious politicisation of the judiciary, and crackdown on freedom of speech. In the past few months, the Egyptian judiciary have handed extreme sentences to political opponents and journalists. Among them is a death sentence to 528 supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood for the death of one policeman.
The continued detention of Greste sends a message to all journalists working in Egypt: “no one is safe”. By imprisoning a foreign Australian journalist, the Egyptian authorities can warn local and international reporters they will be monitoring news reporting and will stifle anything they perceive as dissent.
But Greste and his colleagues, along with their friends and family, must be heartened to see what the reaction from both within and outside Egypt demonstrates: despite a government's best attempts, voices in a courtroom, and voices outside it, cannot be silenced.
• Mohamed Lotfy is observing and documenting the trial on behalf of Amnesty International. He’ll be tweeting updates throughout the day on behalf of the human rights organisation via his account @mlotfy81

Europe's rule of law in worst crisis since cold war, says Council chief

Europe’s rule of law in worst crisis since cold war, says Council of Europe chief
The rule of law in Europe is facing its most serious crisis since the end of the cold war, according to the chief executive of Europe's largest human rights body.
Thorbjørn Jagland, secretary general of the 47-nation Council of Europe, made his assessment before tensions in eastern Ukraine rose over the weekend and before the council's parliamentary assembly voted last Thursday to suspend Russia's voting rights over its annexation of Crimea. Jagland argues that a lack of human rights in Ukraine has paved the way for Russia's actions.
He writes: "In Ukraine the absence of an independent judiciary, and lack of the checks and balances which a functioning parliament and free media should provide, allowed endemic corruption and misuse of power to thrive unchecked. This caused mistrust, social unrest and ultimately a revolution."
Jagland addressed his remarks to member states in an unpublished report on the state of democracy in Europe. The report is due to be released after it has been considered by delegations from the member governments meeting at a summit in Vienna early next month.
Most of the 72-page report is devoted to identifying "very worrying" challenges to human rights, democracies and the rule of law across Europe.
These include discrimination against ethnic and national minorities (in 39 member states); prison overcrowding (30 states); corruption (26 states); ill treatment by police (23 states); social exclusion and discrimination against Roma (20 states); and restrictions of free expression (eight states).
Problems with the judiciary are identified in 20 countries and deeply embedded judicial corruption has been reported in "many" of the 47 Council of Europe states, the report says. In some, the justice system was "completely corrupt". The European court of human rights, which is operated by the Council of Europe, continues to find violations of the right to a trial within a reasonable period of time. In some states, prosecutors sit in court alongside the judges, exercising powers that are too broad and lack transparency.
To avoid the risk that its publication will be vetoed by member states, the report does not name and shame individual governments. But each country was told last November, in confidence, of the three main challenges it is seen as facing. These are not necessarily its worst violations of human rights; they may include persistent and politically difficult issues as well as those that the Council of Europe believes it can best assist in overcoming.
These problems are not confined to eastern Europe. Calling for an improved gender balance within the judiciary, the report notes that two countries have supreme courts that are over 90% male. The UK must be one of them.
"Senior members of the executive branch in some member states have publicly criticised court decisions," the report continues. That was certainly a problem in the UK at one time, although it is fair to say that members of the present government have been more restrained.
More broadly, the council's monitoring bodies have raised concerns about police and prisons as often in northern and western Europe as in central and eastern Europe. Discrimination and social exclusion are widespread, although targeted groups vary from region to region.
The report identifies more effective monitoring as one of the paths to progress. Some standards, such as freedom of expression, are not specifically monitored within Europe. Others, such as the status of minorities, are monitored by overlapping bodies. And some bodies are too slow to cope with emergencies. The report also finds that some countries are reluctant to seek help because of the damage to the state's reputation that might follow.
It offers reassurance that Europe is not divided into countries that have human rights problems and those that do not. But it adds that Europe can be divided into those that are willing to co-operate in addressing their problems and those that are unwilling to do so.
Inevitably, increased monitoring and support will cost more money, which would have to come from member states – although Jagland says that reforms in recent years have led to a "leaner and more efficient organisation". He also wants to hold a summit next year at which heads of state would agree a five-year agenda for democratic security.
If this goes ahead, its recommendations are bound to need funding. But if they give member states less justification for invading each other's territory, it would surely be a small price to pay.

Chagos Islands dispute: court to rule on UK sovereignty claim

Chagos islanders
Britain's sovereignty over the Chagos Islands and America's lease for the Diego Garcia military base could be thrown into doubt by an international court hearing due to open in Istanbul on Tuesday.
It is considered of such importance that the attorney general, Dominic Grieve QC, will appear to defend Britain's declaration of a marine reserve around the archipelago.
The challenge by Mauritius to the legality of the marine protected areaannounced by the then foreign secretary, David Miliband, in April 2010, will be heard behind closed doors by the permanent court of arbitration(PCA), a UN-backed tribunal that resolves disagreements between states. Its rulings are binding.
Mauritius, which launched its legal challenge three years ago, believes a ruling in its favour could lead to the unravelling of Britain's colonial-era claim and the eventual return of hundreds of exiled islanders who have been forced to leave the archipelago. Many now live in Britain.
The PCA is based at The Hague, in the Netherlands, but its judicial proceedings are often held in neutral, international venues. Turkey is host for the latest round in the dispute. The hearing is expected to last several weeks although Grieve will only present the UK's opening arguments.
Teams of prominent British and American lawyers have also been hired by the UK and Mauritius. Among the UK counsel are Sir Michael Wood, a former Foreign Office adviser; Mauritius has recruited Prof James Crawford, Prof Philippe Sands QC and Elizabeth Wilmshurst, a Foreign Office lawyer who resigned on the eve of the invasion of Iraq.
The hearing will be held in secret with none of the proceedings open to the public. At some point it is hoped the documents may be made public, including internal Foreign Office files relating to key decisions from 1965 to April 2010.
The Mauritian prime minister, Navinchandra Ramgoolam, has claimed that the decision to establish a 1,411,550sq km (545,000sq mile) marine reserve was carried out in defiance of assurances given to him at the time by the then UK prime minister, Gordon Brown, in 2009.
Foreign Office cable released by WikiLeaks recorded an official's assertion that "establishing a marine park would, in effect, put paid to resettlement claims of the archipelago's former residents", who were described as "Man Fridays".
In a statement to the UN's general assembly last summer, Ramgoolam said: "The dismemberment of part of our territory, the Chagos archipelago – prior to independence – by the then colonial power, the United Kingdom, in clear breach of international law, leaves the process of decolonisation not only of Mauritius, but of Africa, incomplete."
He added: "I am confident that the UK and the US would want to be on the right side of history. States which look to the law and to the rules of the comity of nations for the resolution of disputes should not be frustrated by the lack of avenues under international law for settlement of these disputes."
In 1965, three years before Mauritius attained independence, the UK decided to "detach" the Chagos Islands from the rest of its then Indian Ocean colony. The Mauritian government, supported by every country in Africa, claims this was in breach of UN general assembly resolution 1514, passed in 1960, which specifically banned the breakup of colonies prior to independence.
The Chagos archipelago was subsequently declared to be part of the British Indian Ocean Territory (Biot) from which, in 1971, the 1,500 islanders were deported. The largest island, Diego Garcia, was then leased to the US as an airbase. The lease is due to be renegotiated later this year.
Claims that Diego Garcia was used as a secret "black site" detention centre during CIA rendition operations after 2001 resurfaced this month after Abdel-Hakim Belhaj – a rebel military commander and opponent of Muammar Gaddafi arrested in Malaysia and forcibly returned to Libya with his then pregnant wife – reported that he had been held there. The Foreign Office has disputed the claim.
The PCA case is being fought within the arcane legal territory of theUnited Nations convention on the law of the sea (Unclos), an area in which the UK could be at disadvantage. While Mauritius and the Seychelles have put in mutually agreed claims for large tracts of the nearby seabed, the UK has not put in any proposals to the UN commission on the limits of the continental shelf in respect of Biot and has now run out of time to do so.
The UK is hoping to persuade the five arbitrators to rule that they do not have jurisdiction over the dispute, but an earlier effort to get that argument decided before dealing with the substantive claim was rejected by the tribunal last year.
A Foreign Office spokesman said: "The rules of procedure established for the purposes of these proceedings provide that any evidence submitted alongside the pleadings of either party is confidential. Therefore, the UK is not in a position to comment on matters which are before the tribunal."

US: Supreme court to review law over Jerusalem's status on US passports

MIDEAST-JERUSALEM-BENJAMIN NETANYAHU-JOHN KERRY-MEETING
Justices will consider the challenge to a rule about whether Americans born in Jerusalem may list Israel as their birthplace.
Confronting an issue fraught with Middle East politics, the supreme court has agreed to hear for the second time a passport dispute centering on whether Americans born in Jerusalem may list their place of birth as Israel.
The court said Monday it will review a lower court ruling that struck down a 2002 law that authorized identifying Jerusalem as part of Israel on US passports. The law was passed over the objection of President George W Bush, and the lower court said the law impermissibly infringed on the president's power to recognize foreign governments. The Obama administration has taken the same position as its predecessor.
The US has refused to recognize any nation's sovereignty over Jerusalem since Israel's creation in 1948. The justices previously ruled on a different aspect of the case.
The challenge to the passport rule was brought by parents of an American boy named Menachem Zivotofsky, who was born in a Jerusalem hospital soon after the law was passed.
The law was part of a large foreign affairs bill that Bush signed into law. But even as he did so, he issued a signing statement in which he said that "US policy regarding Jerusalem has not changed."
Had Zivotofsky been born in Tel Aviv, the State Department would have issued a passport listing his place of birth as Israel. The regular practice for recording the birth of a US citizen abroad is to list the country where it occurred.
But the department's guide tells consular officials, "For a person born in Jerusalem, write Jerusalem as the place of birth in the passport."
Ever since President Harry S Truman recognized Israel upon its declaration of nationhood in 1948, no president has accepted permanent Israeli rule over the entirety of Jerusalem. Since Israel's victory in the 1967 Six-Day War brought the entire city under Israeli control, US policy has regarded the sensitive status of Jerusalem as something ultimately to be determined in talks between Israel and its negotiating partners. The US Embassy remains in Tel Aviv.
In 1995, Congress essentially adopted the Israeli position, saying the US should recognize a united Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Shortly before Zivotofsky's birth, lawmakers passed new provisions urging the president to take steps to move the embassy to Jerusalem and allowing Americans born in Jerusalem to have their place of birth listed as Israel.
Zivotofksy is now 11, and his Washington lawyer, Nathan Lewin, said when he filed the Supreme Court appeal that he hoped the boy's passport could be changed to reflect Israel as his place of birth before his bar mitzvah. Jewish boys have their bar mitzvah at the age of 13.
The court will hear the case in the fall and should hand down a decision by June 2015. Zivotofsky will turn 13 four months later. The case is Zivotofsky v Kerry, 13-628.

Malaysia Bar to offer free advice to plane families


As lawyers from abroad seek to strike up relationships with families of passengers on the missing Malaysia Airlines flight, the Malaysia Bar Council is offering free legal help.
Christopher Leong, chair of the Malaysia Bar Council, said: ‘The Bar Council Legal Aid team will be able to render preliminary legal advice to the family members of those onboard the plane if they require it….If and when the families are ready to commence legal action, they will have to obtain the services of a legal firm which is prepared to take their case. The assistance by the Bar Council Legal Aid team will not include the filing of a civil suit or representing them.’  Preliminary legal issues could include those relating to insurance, procedure, possible causes of action and limitation periods, he said. 
Mr Leong also said that that the Bar Council might take action against foreign firms which illegally offered to provide legal advice services which are not allowed under Malaysian regulatory rules

Armed robber was never told to report to prison

ST. LOUIS (AP) — After he was convicted of armed robbery in 2000, Cornealious Anderson was sentenced to 13 years behind bars and told to await instructions on when and where to report to prison. But those instructions never came.
So Anderson didn't report. He spent the next 13 years turning his life around — getting married, raising three kids, learning a trade. He made no effort to conceal his identity or whereabouts. Anderson paid taxes and traffic tickets, renewed his driver's license and registered his businesses.
Not until last year did the Missouri Department of Corrections discover the clerical error that kept him free. Now he's fighting for release, saying authorities missed their chance to incarcerate him.
In a single day last July, Anderson's life was turned upside-down.
"They sent a SWAT team to his house," Anderson's attorney, Patrick Megaro, said Wednesday. "He was getting his 3-year-old daughter breakfast, and these men with automatic weapons bang on his door."
Anderson, 37, was taken to Southeast Correctional Center in Charleston, Mo., to begin serving the sentence. A court appeal filed in February asks for him to be freed.
Anderson had just one arrest for marijuana possession on his record when he and a cousin robbed an assistant manager for a St. Charles Burger King restaurant on Aug. 15, 1999. The men, wearing masks, showed a gun (it turned out to be a BB gun) and demanded money that was about to be placed in a deposit box.
The worker gave up the bag of cash, and the masked men drove away. The worker turned in the car's license plate number.
Anderson was convicted and sentenced to 13 years in prison and waited for word on what to do next.
"His attorney said, 'Listen, they're going to get you some day, so just wait for the order,'" Megaro said. "As time goes by, the order never comes. What does a normal person believe? Maybe they forgot about it. It's only human nature to hope they just let it go. He really didn't know what to do.
"A year goes by, two years, five years, 10 years. He's thinking, 'I guess they don't care about me anymore,'" Megaro said.
So Anderson went about his life. Megaro said he was not a fugitive, was never on the run. In fact, just the opposite.
Megaro described Anderson as a model citizen — a married father who became a carpenter and started three businesses. He paid income and property taxes and kept a driver's license showing his true name and address. When he was pulled over for a couple of traffic violations, nothing showed up indicating he should be in prison.
That's why Anderson was shocked when the marshals arrived.
He now lives among the general population at Charleston. Megaro said Anderson is holding his own— barely.
"He's doing his best to keep his spirits up," Megaro said. "Each day that goes by, more hope is lost. It's a daily struggle for him."
Peter Joy, director of the Criminal Justice Clinic at the Washington University School of Law in St. Louis, said it isn't unusual in a country with such a high prison population for sentences to fall through the cracks. What is unusual, Joy said, is for it to go unnoticed for so long.
"The real tragedy here is that one aspect of prison is the idea of rehabilitation," Joy said. "Here we have somebody who has led a perfect life for 13 years. He did everything right. So he doesn't need rehabilitation."
What happens next isn't clear. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster on Tuesday filed a court response that said the state is justified in making Anderson serve the sentence.
However, Koster wrote that Megaro could refile the case as an action against the director of the Department of Corrections, which could give Anderson credit for the time he was technically at large.
Megaro doubted that strategy would work. He said the law does not allow credit for time served when the convicted person was not behind bars.
"I don't think that's an option, unfortunately," Megaro said.
Instead, he's relying on case law. The last time anything like this happened in Missouri was 1912. In that case, the convicted man was set free, Megaro said.
Gov. Jay Nixon could also commute the sentence. A spokesman for Nixon declined to comment

Cops: Man goes to courthouse in stolen car

Young man in handcuffs
SONORA, Calif. — Police say a man came to a court appearance in the Central Valley in a stolen vehicle.
James Manning was arrested after police say they received a call from an auto dealership in Redding on Friday reporting the vehicle stolen. The vehicle's GPS indicated it was parked in front of the Tuolumne County courthouse in Sonora.
Officers found the 2001 Mitsubishi with different license plates on it. Sonora police say Manning's wife, 45-year-old Teresa Castillo, told officers her husband had bought the car earlier in the day for $200 so they could drive to Sonora for his court appearance.
But when police contacted the 49-year-old Manning inside the courthouse, they say he acknowledged knowing the car was stolen. He and Castillo were arrested on suspicion of possession of stolen property and possession of a controlled substance.

Saudi sentences three to death over 2003 attacks


A Saudi court has sentenced three men to death and jailed 40 more for assisting suicide bombers who attacked three residence compounds in Riyadh in 2003.
The court said more than 25 people were killed in the attack, including 18 foreigners, along with 12 of the assailants.
It said one of them was also found guilty of plotting to blow up an air base in the south of the kingdom.
It added that 40 defendants received sentences ranging from two to 26 years for offences, including collaboration with or pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda.
Saudi Arabia had suffered a wave of attacks, thought to have been linked to al-Qaeda between 2003 and 2006.

US defendant shot dead in courtroom attack

A man accused of robbery and assault was shot and killed in a Salt Lake City court after he lunged at a witness giving evidence.
Siale Angilau, 25, died in hospital after being shot several times by a US marshal in front of the jury at the new federal courthouse.
The FBI said he had rushed towards the witness with a pen in an “aggressive, threatening manner”.
Angilau was the last of 17 accused gang members tried as part of a 2010 case.
The case included 29 counts, including assault, conspiracy, robbery and weapons offences.
Perry Cardwell, who was in the courtroom with his adult daughter, told the Associated Press news agency at least six shots were fired.
“It was kind of traumatising,” Sara Jacobson, his daughter, said.
The witness on the stand at the time was not identified and was not injured.
He appeared to be in his mid-20s and was testifying about gang initiation, Cardwell said.
US District Judge Tena Campbell declared a mistrial, writing in her order that members of the jury were visibly shaken and upset.
Angilau’s lawyer declined to answer questions as he left the court on Monday. The accused had been transferred to federal custody last week after serving time in prison in Utah on other charges.
The new federal courthouse in Salt Lake City opened just a week ago. It was designed with several security features, including bulletproof glass in some areas and separate routes in and out for judges, prisoners and the public.

Indian court lifts Goa iron ore mining ban

India’s Supreme Court has lifted a ban on iron ore mining in the western state of Goa, but limited extraction to 20m tonnes a year.
The miners will also need to renew their leases with the Goa government.
All 90 iron ore mines in Goa were shut down after a government-backed inquiry in 2012 alleged they were illegal and lacked environmental permission to operate.
It had claimed the state lost nearly $6bn (£3.75bn) due to illegal mining.
The ban in Goa followed a similar move in the southern state of Karnataka in 2011.
According to some estimates, those restrictions have cut India’s iron ore exports by 85 per cent, or 100m tonnes, over the past two years.
Analysts said the lifting of the ban may help trigger a gradual recovery in the sector.
“The 20m tonnes is a reasonable quantity to start with,” said Basant Poddar, vice-president of the Federation of Indian Mineral Industries.
“Fresh mining will start after the monsoon and exports [of iron ore] may start in September.”
The court has also asked an expert panel to study the environmental impact of the mining and give its final recommendation on the annual cap on extraction within six months.