#landmark ruling

The ruling by a district court, the first in Japan on the legality of same-sex marriages, is a major symbolic victory in a country where the constitution still defines marriage as being based on "the mutual consent of both sexes".

STRASBOURG, France | The Latest: Navalny hails European court victory

STRASBOURG, France — The Latest on a European court ruling on Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny (all times local):

11:30 a.m. Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny says his win at the European Court of Human Rights is important for other political activists in Russia who are targeted by the state.

The court in Strasbourg on Thursday passed a landmark ruling saying that arrests of…

ISLAMABAD | Pakistan acquits Christian woman facing death for blasphemy

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s top court on Wednesday acquitted a Christian woman who was sentenced to death in 2010 on blasphemy charges, a landmark ruling that could ignite mass protests or violence by hard-line Islamists.

Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisarannounced the verdict to a packed courtroom and ordered Asia Bibi released. She has been held at an undisclosed location for security reasons and is…

THE HAGUE, Netherlands | Dutch appeals court upholds landmark climate case ruling

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — A Dutch appeals court has upheld a landmark ruling that ordered the Dutch government to cut the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by at least 25 percent by 2020 from benchmark 1990 levels.

The original June 2015 ruling came in a case brought by the environmental group Urgenda on behalf of 900 Dutch citizens.

Similar cases are now underway in several countries around the…

New Post has been published on https://www.stl.news/man-waits-for-shot-at-freedom-2-years-after-landmark-ruling/74319/

Man waits for shot at freedom 2 years after landmark ruling

BATON ROUGE, La/January 25, 2018 (AP)(STL.News) — A landmark ruling by the nation’s highest court gave Henry Montgomery his first chance at freedom after nearly a half-century behind bars. Two years later, the 71-year-old Louisiana man is still waiting for a parole hearing that could set him free.

Thursday is the two-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Montgomery’s favor. The decision enabled roughly 2,000 inmates to argue for their release after receiving mandatory life-without-parole sentences as juveniles.

Louisiana’s parole board was scheduled to hear Montgomery’s case on Dec. 14 but postponed the hearing until Feb. 19.

Montgomery was 17 when he killed a sheriff’s deputy in 1963.

The Supreme Court decided in 2012 that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for juveniles are unconstitutional “cruel and unusual” punishment. The justices made their decision retroactive in Montgomery’s case.

The decision ushered in a wave of new sentences and the release of inmates from Michigan to Pennsylvania, Arkansas and beyond. But other former teen offenders are still waiting for a chance at resentencing in states and counties that have been slow to address the court ruling, an Associated Press investigation found. In Michigan, for example, prosecutors are seeking new no-parole sentences for nearly two-thirds of 363 juvenile lifers.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said prisoners like Montgomery “must be given the opportunity to show their crime did not reflect irreparable corruption; and, if it did not, their hope for some years of life outside prison walls must be restored.”

A state judge who resentenced Montgomery to life with the possibility of parole said in June that he’s a “model prisoner” who appears to be rehabilitated.

Montgomery initially was sentenced to death after a jury convicted him of fatally shooting Charles Hurt, an East Baton Rouge sheriff’s deputy.

After the Louisiana Supreme Court ruled he didn’t get a fair trial and threw out his murder conviction in 1966, Montgomery was retried, found “guilty without capital punishment” and automatically sentenced to life without parole.

New Post has been published on http://www.newsnish.com/international/landmark-ruling-on-greenhouse-gas-in-netherlands-court-orders-govt-to-cut-emissions/

Landmark Ruling on Greenhouse Gas in Netherlands Court orders govt to cut emissions

A Dutch court yesterday ordered the state to slash greenhouse gas emissions nationwide by at least 25 percent by 2020, in a case that could serve as a blueprint for activists around the world.

Climate experts called the ruling a “milestone”, saying it would encourage concerned citizens in other countries to take their own governments to court to force them to cut the gases blamed for global warming.

“The court orders the State to reduce the overall volume of greenhouse gas emissions in such a way that they are at least 25 percent less in 2020 compared to 1990,” judge Hans Hofhuis said as the courtroom erupted in cheers and applause.

The ruling by The Hague’s District Court came after almost 900 Dutch citizens took their government to court in April in a bid to force a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to tackle climate change.

Environmental rights group Urgenda, which brought the case, had said it wanted The Hague to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent over 1990 levels by 2020.

Current Dutch policy is to reduce emissions by 17 percent by 2020, less than the 25-40 percent international norm for industrialised nations, the court said.

“The parties agree that the severity and magnitude of climate change make it necessary to take measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” the court said in its ruling.

Effective control of Dutch emissions is “one of the State’s tasks,” it said, adding that the cost of the reductions would not be “unacceptably high”.

“This is a world first for us,” Urgenda head Marjan Minnesma told AFP at the court, expressing hopes that the precedent set by the Netherlands would be “followed by many across the world.”

Amsterdam-based Urgenda said the case was the first in Europe in which citizens attempted to hold the state responsible for its potentially devastating inaction on climate change, and the first in the world in which human rights were used as a legal basis to protect citizens against its effects.

A spokesman for the Dutch environment ministry said it was examining the ruling, which can be appealed.

The 28-member European Union has said it will reduce emissions by 40 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2030, while the world’s second-largest polluter after China, the United States, has said it wants to reduce emissions by between 26-28 percent by 2025, compared to 2005 levels.

New Post has been published on http://www.therakyatpost.com/world/2014/04/16/indian-top-court-recognises-transgenders-in-landmark-ruling/

Indian top court recognises transgenders in landmark ruling

NEW DELHI, April 15:

India’s top court on Tuesday recognised the country’s long marginalised transgender community as a third gender and, in a landmark judgment lauded by human rights groups, called on the government to ensure their equal treatment.

There are hundreds of thousands of transgenders in India, say activists, but because they are not legally recognised, they are ostracised, discriminated against, abused and often forced into prostitution.

“Recognition of transgenders as a third gender is not a social or medical issue but a human rights issue,” the Supreme Court’s two-judge bench said in its ruling.

“Transgenders are also citizens of India. The spirit of the constitution is to provide equal opportunity to every citizen to grow and attain their potential, irrespective of caste, religion or gender.”

A person who is transgender does not identify with the gender stated on their birth certificate.

The court ruling – which came after hearing a petition filed by a group of transgenders demanding equal rights – recognised the community as a marginalised group and directed authorities to implement policies to improve their socio-economic status.

The petitioners’ lawyers said that this would mean that all identity documents, including a birth certificate, passport and driving licence would recognise the third gender, along with male and female.

The government will also have to allocate a certain percentage of public sector jobs, seats in schools and colleges to third gender applicants, said lawyer Sanjeev Bhatnagar.

Due to their lack of access to jobs and education, many male-to-female transgenders – also known as “hijras” – are forced to work as sex workers or move around in organised groups begging or demanding money.

Hate crimes in the conservative country are common, say activists, yet few are reported partly due to a lack of sensitivity by authorities such as the police.

Transgender rights activist Laxmi Narayan Tripathi said the verdict was a great step towards ending such discrimination.

“Today Justice Radhakrishnan and Justice A.K. Sikri said that any nation can progress only after it grants all the rights and human rights to its citizens. The transgenders have been given the biggest right,” said Tripathi. “Today I feel a proud citizen of India.”

The Supreme Court was slammed by human rights activists in December when it reinstated a ban on gay sex, following a four-year period of decriminalisation that helped bring homosexuality into the open. The court said only parliament could change the law.

Human rights groups said they hoped the ruling on transgenders would encourage the new parliament to repeal the anti-homosexuality law as one of its first actions.

A Landmark Ruling

Dear Oscar

This week, Judge Dunstan Mlambo made a landmark ruling. Today, for the first time in the history of the S. African justice system, it was ruled that parts of a trial can be broadcast live on TV and in full on radio. And today, I wept. I wept, anxious that the fairness of your trial might be compromised. I wept at the thought of the media circus that will inevitably ensue. I wept at the…