Tag Archives: law

World

Saudi Arabia announces legal reforms paving the way for codified law

Leave a comment

Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman attends the 41st Summit of Gulf Cooperation Council in Al-Ula, Saudi Arabia on January 05, 2021.

Royal Council of Saudi Arabia | Anadolu Agency | Getty Images

Saudi Arabia has announced new judicial reforms, putting the kingdom on a path to codified law — a huge step, considering the deeply conservative country has no codified legal system to accompany the Sharia, or Islamic law, which is currently in place.  

“The Personal Status Law, the Civil Transactions Law, the Penal Code for Discretionary Sanctions, and the Law of Evidence represent a new wave of judicial reforms in the Kingdom,” Saudi state news agency SPA quoted Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as saying late Monday evening. 

The reforms, the crown prince said, “will help with the prediction of court rulings, the increase of the level of integrity and efficiency of judicial institutions, and will contribute to the increase of the reliability of procedures and control mechanisms.” The new laws are to be announced over the course of 2021, according to his statement.

The news is the latest in a series of dramatic economic and social reforms launched by the 35-year-old crown prince aimed at modernizing the kingdom. It fits into his Vision 2030 agenda which aims to diversify the economy away from oil and attract foreign talent and investment to the kingdom, and comes as Saudi Arabia pitches itself as a destination for international business headquarters.

“This is an important step on the path towards global best practices that give businesses the confidence to invest,” Tarek Fadlallah, Middle East CEO at Nomura Asset Management, told CNBC on Tuesday.

Having no codified legal system often resulted in inconsistency in court rulings and long, drawn-out litigation procedures. The announcement made a specific mention of women in Saudi Arabia, who have long held a lower status to men in terms of legal and economic rights, and who the crown prince described as being particularly harmed by the lack of written laws over certain issues. 

“Discrepancies in court rulings has led to a lack of clarity in the rules governing the incidents and practices, and has hurt many, mostly women,” the SPA quoted Bin Salman as saying.  

Women’s rights in the kingdom — while improved in some areas like driving, employment, and freedom of movement in recent years — are still a major target of criticism by human rights groups and some foreign governments. Several Saudi female driving activists remain in prison and allege they are being tortured, charges the Saudi state denies.  

Ali Shihabi, a Saudi analyst close to the kingdom’s royal court, tweeted about the reforms late Monday, describing the news as “an important step in legal reform and one that recognizes that the Saudi legal system has a way to go to reach international standards and that the leadership appreciates the urgency and importance of such reform.”

“Highlighting its impact on women is particularly interesting,” Shihabi added. 

The crown prince described the current legal system as “painful for many individuals and families, especially women, permitting some to evade their responsibilities. This will not take place again once these laws are promulgated pursuant to legislative laws and procedures,” he said. The statement did not outline further details of what specific practices and penalties would be changed.

His statement added that the forthcoming legal reforms will “will tackle lack of clarity in rules governing… prolonged litigations that are not based on established legal provisions, and absence of a clear legal framework for individuals and businesses.”

Read original article here

Business

U.S. Drops Net Neutrality Lawsuit Against California

Leave a comment

Photo: Mandel Ngan/AFP (Getty Images)

The U.S. Department of Justice has dropped its Trump-era lawsuit against California enacting its own net neutrality rules.

The news, spotted by Ars Technica, means the federal government is letting the state do what it wants when it comes to net neutrality, which is in line with the Biden Administration’s promise to reinstate the laws at the federal level. Federal Communications Commission Acting Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement that she is “pleased” by the turn of events.

The California Internet Consumer Protection and Net Neutrality Act was signed into law on Sept. 30, 2018, in response to the FCC’s move to repeal net neutrality. Designed to fill the void left by the Ajit Pai-led FCC, the law prevents internet service providers from: blocking and slowing lawful traffic; paid prioritization of service; getting paid for zero-rating some content in a category, but not all content in that category (looking at you, AT&T); and not being transparent about network management practices, performance, and commercial terms.

Hours after the law went into effect, the Trump-era DOJ filed a lawsuit against California, claiming that states have no jurisdiction over the Internet. As a result, California agreed to not enforce the law in exchange for the DOJ not moving ahead with the lawsuit. In August of last year, the Trump administration resumed its lawsuit against California, but the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the FCC could not force individual states to uphold the net neutrality repeal—although it did say the FCC could repeal its own net neutrality rules, sadly. The court upheld the claim that broadband isn’t a telecommunications service, somehow unconvinced by the millions of people working and attending school from home due to the covid-19 pandemic.

Now that the lawsuit has been formally dismissed, however, this leaves California in a position to actually enforce the law it passed over two years ago.

G/O Media may get a commission

But there’s another roadblock: the ISPs. Several major lobby groups representing some of the largest telecoms in the US—Comcast, Charter, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, Sprint, Cox, Frontier, and CenturyLink—filed a separate lawsuit against the state in October 2018 calling the act an example of “unconstitutional state regulation” and that it undermined federal law. The lobby groups amended their lawsuit in August last year.

It’s unclear what or how much legal precedence this argument still holds, considering the DOJ has now formally withdrawn its lawsuit against California. And with Rosenworcel currently at the helm of the FCC, it’s entirely possible net neutrality will be reinstated. All that combined would seem to render the broadband lobbyists’ argument moot. However, President Biden would need to nominate a new Democratic commissioner and have that nomination approved by the Senate to break the 2-2 deadlock between Democrats and Republicans in the FCC.

Read original article here

World

Hong Kong BN(O) visa: UK prepares to welcome thousands fleeing national security law

Leave a comment

Last year, China imposed a sweeping national security law on Hong Kong that critics say has stripped the city of its autonomy and precious civil and social freedoms, while cementing Beijing’s authoritarian rule over the territory. Since then, many prominent activists and politicians have fled, while others have begun quietly arranging to move overseas.

The law criminalizes secession, subversion and collusion with foreign forces, and carries with it a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

Under the new program, those with BN(O) status and their eligible family members will be able to travel to the UK to live, study and work, becoming eligible for settlement in the UK in five years, and citizenship 12 months after that.
In a statement Friday, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said by taking this move, “we have honored our profound ties of history and friendship with the people of Hong Kong, and we have stood up for freedom and autonomy — values both the UK and Hong Kong hold dear.”

According to data from the UK Home Office, acquired by CNN through a freedom of information request, since July 2019, when anti-government protests broke out across the city, over 400,000 BN(O) passports have been issued to Hong Kong residents, more than the total number issued for the previous 15 years.

At the time the national security law was proposed, the number of passports issued jumped from 7,515 in June 2020, to over 24,000 in July. Those numbers may also be lower than the amount of people applying, as the coronavirus pandemic appears to have impacted the processing of passports last summer.

Before the UK announced the new path to citizenship, there were around 350,000 BN(O) passport holders, but the number of people who are eligible — those born before 1997, in British-ruled Hong Kong — could be as high as 3 million.

China has reacted angrily to the proposed plan, claiming it breaches the agreement under which Hong Kong was handed over from British to Chinese rule, which London in turn argues the national security law undermines.

In a regular press conference Friday, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Zhao Lijian accused the UK of “disregarding the fact that Hong Kong has returned to the motherland for 24 years” and violating promises made at the time of handover.

He said the BN(O) path to citizenship “seriously violates China’s sovereignty, grossly interferes in Hong Kong affairs and China’s internal affairs, and seriously violates international law and basic norms of international relations.”

From January 31, Zhao said, China will no longer recognize BN(O) passports as travel documents or identification proof, “and reserves the right to take further measures.”

It’s not clear what practical effects such a move would have, however, as most Hong Kong residents, whether foreign or Chinese nationals, use locally-issued identification cards for the purposes of entering or exiting the territory, and also for most identification purposes. Many of those who are eligible for a BN(O) passport will also be entitled to apply for, and may already hold, a Hong Kong passport, which can also be used for these purposes.

BN(O) passports have never been fully accepted for travel to mainland China, where ethnic Chinese Hong Kong residents use a “home return” permit along with their Hong Kong identification card or passport.

Given the limited scope of this immediate response, many have suggested further steps could be coming, especially if a large number of people exit Hong Kong in coming months.

According to the South China Morning Post, a Hong Kong newspaper, the Beijing government has mulled stripping BN(O) holders in Hong Kong of the right to hold public office and potentially even the right to vote.
Writing earlier this month, Regina Ip, a member of Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam’s cabinet, suggested that as a result of the UK’s move, Beijing could revoke the right of Hong Kongers to hold dual citizenship, something not enjoyed by people on the mainland, and impose Chinese nationality laws fully on the city.

“Thereafter, Hong Kong Chinese who acquire a foreign nationality of their own free will, will be deemed to have lost Chinese nationality, in strict accordance with Article 9 of the Chinese Nationality Law,” Ip said. “When they make a conscious decision to leave and, by implication, give up on Hong Kong, it is only right that they should be asked to make their choice — China or a foreign country — foreign citizenship or the right of abode and the right to vote in Hong Kong.”

Despite this and other threats, researchers estimate as many as 600,000 Hong Kongers could move to the UK within the first three years of the policy, and potentially far more, as continued crackdowns under the national security law prompt people to leave.

Nor might BN(O) holders be the only people leaving. Around the time of the 1997 handover, many Hong Kongers acquired foreign citizenship, especially in Commonwealth countries such as Canada and Australia, both of which had generous immigration policies at the time.

Pro democracy activists and protesters who do not hold foreign nationality have also begun applying for asylum overseas in greater numbers, particularly in the wake of a crackdown last year on those who took part in the 2019 unrest.

In December 2020, former lawmaker Ted Hui dramatically fled Hong Kong, taking advantage of a fake environmental conference to jump his bail, and has now sought asylum in the UK. Nathan Law, a prominent former lawmaker and leader of the 2014 Umbrella Movement, has also claimed asylum there, while others have sought protection in Germany, the US, and Australia.

Escaping overseas does not always equal complete freedom: Law and other exiles have complained of being tailed and even harassed by people they believe are agents of the Chinese government, a charge Beijing’s representatives have denied. They are also limited in what communications they can have with family and friends back in Hong Kong, for fear of getting them in trouble with the authorities.

While most BN(O) holders living in the UK are unlikely to be monitored in such a way, the intense political environment around the new scheme may make it difficult to return for those who decide they do not want to stay in Britain.

Ray Wong, an activist who fled to Germany in 2017, becoming among the first Hong Kongers to gain asylum in Europe, told CNN last year that he missed “basically everything in Hong Kong.”

“I miss being surrounded by Hong Kong people, being surrounded by Cantonese-speaking people,” he said. “I even miss the very unpleasant climate.”

CNN’s Jenni Marsh and Angela Dewan contributed reporting.

Read original article here

World

Kremlin: US statements about pro-Navalny protests show ‘direct support for the violation of the law’

Leave a comment

Kremlin officials blasted the U.S. government for expressing support for protests that swept Russia in support of arrested opposition leader Alexei Navalny, accusing the U.S. of backing violations of the law.

The protests, which drew tens of thousands of demonstrators, led police to make thousands of arrests. U.S. officials making statements in support of the demonstrators and condemning the police response included the U.S. embassy in Moscow, the State Department, Sen. Ben SasseBen SasseFormer official acknowledges final days in office a ‘black eye’ for Trump Republican senators and courage The next pandemic may be cyber — How Biden administration can stop it MORE (R-Neb.) and Rep. Michael McCaulMichael Thomas McCaulCheney tests Trump grip on GOP post-presidency US ambassador to Israel Twitter account briefly includes West Bank, Gaza Biden urged to reverse Pompeo-Trump move on Houthis MORE (R-Texas), the top Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

“The U.S. supports the right of all people to peaceful protest, freedom of expression,” embassy spokeswoman Rebecca Ross tweeted. “Steps being taken by Russian authorities are suppressing those rights.”

Dmitry Peskov, a spokesperson for President Vladimir PutinVladimir Vladimirovich PutinRussian protesters pelt police with snowballs as more than 2,000 arrested Russia arrests hundreds of protesters demanding release of Kremlin critic Navalny What might have been, if Trump had not acted as his own worst enemy MORE, said in a statement that U.S. officials’ reactions “indirectly constitute absolute interference in our internal affairs” and are “direct support for the violation of the law of the Russian Federation, support for unauthorized actions,” according to The Associated Press.

“[M]any will say that many people came out for the illegal actions,” Peskov added. “No, few people came out; many people vote for Putin.”

Navalny became ill on a domestic flight last year and was rushed to a German hospital, which diagnosed him as having been poisoned with the Soviet-era nerve agent Novichok.

After his discharge from the hospital, Russia’s prison agency informed him that he would be in violation of the terms of a 2014 suspended sentence unless he returned to Russia immediately. Navalny returned to Moscow last weekend, five months after leaving Russia, and was arrested at the airport.

Navalny is set to appear for a court hearing Feb. 2.



Read original article here

World

Argentina’s abortion law enters force under watchful eyes

Leave a comment

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — Argentina’s groundbreaking abortion law goes into force Sunday under the watchful eyes of women’s groups and government officials, who hope to ensure its full implementation despite opposition from some conservative and church groups.

Argentina became the largest nation in Latin America to legalize elective abortion after its Senate on Dec. 30 passed a law guaranteeing the procedure up to the 14th week of pregnancy and beyond that in cases of rape or when a woman’s health is at risk.

The vote was hailed as a triumph for the South American country’s feminist movement that could pave the way for similar actions across the socially conservative, heavily Roman Catholic region.

But Pope Francis had issued a last-minute appeal before the vote and church leaders have criticized the decision. Supporters of the law say they expect lawsuits from anti-abortion groups in Argentina’s conservative provinces and some private health clinics might refuse to carry out the procedure.

“Another huge task lies ahead of us,” said Argentina’s minister of women, gender and diversity, Elizabeth Gómez Alcorta, who has acknowledged there will be obstacles to the law’s full implementation across the country.

Gómez Alcorta said a telephone line will be set up “for those who cannot access abortion to communicate.”

The Argentine Catholic Church has repudiated the law and conservative doctors’ and lawyers’ groups have urged resistance. Doctors and health professionals can claim conscientious objection to performing abortions, but cannot invoke the right if a pregnant woman’s life or health is in danger.

A statement signed by the Consortium of Catholic Doctors, the Catholic Lawyers Corporation and other groups called on doctors and lawyers to “resist with nobility, firmness and courage the norm that legalizes the abominable crime of abortion.”

The anti-abortion group Unidad Provida also urged doctors, nurses and technicians to fight for their “freedom of conscience” and promised to “accompany them in all the trials that are necessary.”

Under the law, private health centers that do not have doctors willing to carry out abortions must refer women seeking abortions to clinics that will. Any public official or health authority who unjustifiably delays an abortion will be punished with imprisonment from three months to one year.

The National Campaign for the Right to Legal, Safe and Free Abortion, an umbrella group for organizations that for years fought for legal abortion, often wearing green scarves at protests, vowed to “continue monitoring compliance with the law.”

“We trust the feminist networks that we have built over decades,” said Laura Salomé, one of the movement’s members.

A previous abortion bill was voted down by Argentine lawmakers in 2018 by a narrow margin. But in the December vote it was backed by the center-left government, boosted by the so-called “piba” revolution, from the Argentine slang for “girls,” and opinion polls showing opposition had softened.

The law’s supporters expect backlash in Argentina’s conservative provinces. In the northern province of Salta, a federal judge this week rejected a measure filed by a former legislator calling for the law to be suspended because the legislative branch had exceeded its powers. Opponents of abortion cite international treaties signed by Argentina pledging to protect life from conception.

Gómez Alcorta said criminal charges currently pending against more than 1,500 women and doctors who performed abortions should be lifted. She said the number of women and doctors detained “was not that many,” but didn’t provide a number.

“The Ministry of Women is going to carry out its leadership” to end these cases, she said.

Tamara Grinberg, 32, who had a clandestine abortion in 2012, celebrated that from now on “a girl can go to a hospital to say ‘I want to have an abortion.’”

She said when she had her abortion, very few people helped her. “Today there are many more support networks … and the decision is respected. When I did it, no one respected my decision.”

While abortion is already allowed in some other parts of Latin America — such as in Uruguay, Cuba and Mexico City — its legalization in Argentina is expected to reverberate across the region, where dangerous clandestine procedures remain the norm a half century after a woman’s right to choose was guaranteed in the U.S.

___

AP journalists Víctor Caivano and Yésica Brumec contributed to this report.

Read original article here

Health

Law enforcement procession for slain Sacramento County deputy

Leave a comment

Watch: Law enforcement procession for slain Sacramento County deputy

A large law enforcement procession for slain Sacramento County deputy Adam Gibson was held Friday morning. Gibson, K-9 Riley and a chase suspect were killed in a shootout on Cal Expo grounds earlier this week. >> See part of the procession in the video aboveShortly after 10 a.m., Gibson’s body was taken from the county coroner’s office to a funeral home in Folsom. Due to COVID-19 concerns, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office did not encourage residents to gather for the procession.

SACRAMENTO, Calif. —

A large law enforcement procession for slain Sacramento County deputy Adam Gibson was held Friday morning.

Gibson, K-9 Riley and a chase suspect were killed in a shootout on Cal Expo grounds earlier this week.

>> See part of the procession in the video above

Shortly after 10 a.m., Gibson’s body was taken from the county coroner’s office to a funeral home in Folsom.

Due to COVID-19 concerns, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office did not encourage residents to gather for the procession.

Read original article here

World

France passes law protecting the sounds and smells of the countryside

Leave a comment

(CNN) — France has passed a law protecting the “sensory heritage” of its rural areas, in the face of complaints about the noises and smells typical of the countryside.

Senators voted to approve the law, which passed through the lower house of parliament last year, on Thursday, according to a statement from Joël Giraud, the Minister for Rural Affairs.

Giraud said he celebrated the adoption of the law, which aims to “define and protect the sensory heritage of the French countryside.”

Better understanding the typical “sounds and smells” of rural areas will be useful in “preventing disagreements between neighbors,” the statement continued.

Saint-Pierre-d’Oléron in western France was the rural community at the center of Maurice the rooster’s 2019 trial.

Hemis/Alamy

Regional authorities will be tasked with defining “rural heritage, including its sensory identity,” Giraud said.

“It’s a real victory for rural communities,” he added. “Do your part, let’s preserve the countryside.”

France has seen an increasing number of social conflicts between long-term residents of rural communities and new arrivals.

One emblematic case involved a rooster called Maurice, who was put on trial in July 2019 after neighbors complained about his early morning crowing.

However, a court in Rochefort, western France, rejected the neighbors’ complaints of noise pollution and ordered them to pay €1,000 (around $1,200) in damages.

The case came to symbolize growing divisions between rural and urban France as the neighbors were city-dwellers who only visited Saint-Pierre-d’Oléron a few times a year.

“He is a rooster. Roosters have the desire to sing,” Corinne Fesseau, who owned Maurice, said at the time of the trial.

“That is the countryside. We must protect the countryside,” she added.

Christophe Sueur, mayor of Saint-Pierre-d’Oléron, told CNN the verdict was “common sense,” adding: “I am all for preserving French traditions. The rooster cry is a French tradition that needs to be preserved.”

Maurice is now sadly deceased, but Giraud mentioned the rooster in a tweet celebrating the new law, writing: “A posthumous victory for Maurice the rooster, a symbol of rural life!”



Read original article here

Business

Google threatens to remove its search engine from Australia if new law goes into effect

Leave a comment

Google is threatening to pull its search engine from an entire country — Australia — if a proposed law goes into effect that would force Google to pay news publishers for their content.

“If this version of the Code were to become law it would give us no real choice but to stop making Google Search available in Australia,” Google Australia and New Zealand VP Meg Silva told Australia’s Senate Economics Legislation Committee today.

“We have had to conclude after looking at the legislation in detail we do not see a way, with the financial and operational risks, that we could continue to offer a service in Australia,” she added, according to The Sydney Morning Herald.

The company, which has been lobbying against Australia’s plan for months, claims the country is trying to make it pay to show links and snippets to news stories in Google Search, not just for news articles features in places like Google News, saying it “would set an untenable precedent for our business, and the digital economy” and that it’s “not compatible with how search engines work.”

Australia’s Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), which drafted the law, seemed to suggest in August that this shouldn’t affect Google’s search business: “Google will not be required to charge Australians for the use of its free services such as Google Search and YouTube, unless it chooses to do so.” Clearly, Google disagrees.

As Google explains in Silva’s full statement and an accompanying blog post, it would rather pay publishers specifically for its Google News products. (It already announced a program to pay publishers in Australia, Germany and Brazil back in June.)

Australia doesn’t seem to think that’s enough, though. The ACCC believes the proposed law addresses “a significant bargaining power imbalance between Australian news media businesses and Google and Facebook.” As my colleague Jon Porter put it in August:

Australia’s proposed News Media Bargaining Code law, which is currently in draft and targets Facebook alongside Google, follows a 2019 inquiry in Australia that found the tech giant to be taking a disproportionately large share of online advertising revenue, even though much of their content came from media organizations. Since then, the news and media industry have been hit hard by the pandemic. The Guardian reports that over a hundred local newspapers in Australia have had to lay off journalists and either shut down or stop printing as advertising revenue has fallen.

Facebook is also in the ACCC’s sights with this particular law, and is threatening to block its news from being shared in Australia, too. Both companies are calling these blockages a “worst case” scenario, and Google insisted it wasn’t a threat, but it certainly sounds like one.

Read original article here