Algeria's UN draft resolution on "the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question", S/2024/173 (20 February 2024)
Algeria's UN draft resolution calling for immediate ceasefire in Palestine was vetoed by United States during UN Security Council's 9552nd meeting on 20 February 2024.
20 February 2024 UN press release: Security Council Again Fails to Adopt Resolution Demanding Immediate Humanitarian Ceasefire in Gaza on Account of Veto by United States
UN Security Council veto records: https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/veto
UN Security Council 2024 meeting records: https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick/meetings/2024
Full draft resolution:
> > > United Nations Security Council > Distr: General > 20 February 2024 > Original: English > > > > Algeria: draft resolution > > > > The Security Council, > > > > Reaffirming the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, > > > > Recalling all its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question, > > > > Recalling also the Order delivered on 26 January 2024 by the International Court of Justice indicating provisional measures to Israel in the case concerning the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (South Africa v. Israel) in relation to the right of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip to be protected from all acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention, > > > > Recalling further the letter dated 6 December 2023 of the Secretary-General, under Article 99 of the Charter of the United Nations, ad dressed to the President of the Security Council (S/2023/962), > > > > Reiterating its demand that all parties to the conflict comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, in particular with regard to the conduct of hostilities and the protection of civilians and civilian objects, and recalling the obligation to respect and protect humanitarian relief and medical personnel as well as medical infrastructure, medical transports and the wounded and sick, and to refrain from depriving the Palestinian civilian population in the Gaza Strip of essential goods and services indispensable to their survival and humanitarian assistance, consistent with international humanitarian law and international human rights law, > > > > Reaffirming the obligations of all parties regarding the provision of humanitarian assistance, and its demand that they allow, facilitate and enable the immediate, full, safe and unhindered delivery of humanitarian assistance at scale directly to the Palestinian civilian population throughout the Gaza Strip, > > > > Welcoming the appointment of Ms. Sigrid Kaag, as Senior Humanitarian and Reconstruction Coordinator for Gaza pursuant to its resolution 2720, underscoring the need to provide her team with the resources and support necessary to fulfil her mandate, and emphasizing the urgent need to expand the flow of humanitarian assistance to civilians in the Gaza Strip, > > > > Reaffirming its strong concern for the disproportionate and grave effect that the conflict is having on the civilian population, with particular impact on the lives and well-being of children, women, and persons with disabilities as well as other civilians in vulnerable situations, > > > > Expressing grave concern over the dire and urgently deteriorating humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip and the adverse conditions of life for and suffering of the Palestinian civilian population, > > > > Expressing also grave concern over the impact of the situation in Gaza on regional and international peace and security, > > > > Emphasizing the imperative of accountability for all violations of international law, > > > > Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967, and reiterating the vision of the two-state solution, with the Gaza Strip as part of the Palestinian State, > > > > 1. Demands an immediate humanitarian ceasefire that must be respected by all parties; > 2. Reiterates its demand that all parties scrupulously comply with their obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, in particular including with regard to the protection of civilians and civilian objects, and in this regard deplores all attacks against civilians and civilian objects, as well as all violence and hostilities against civilians, and all acts of terrorism; > 3. Rejects forced displacement of the Palestinian civilian population, including women and children, in violation of international law, including international humanitarian law and international human rights law, and demands an immediate end to any such violations; > 4. Demands the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address medical needs of all hostages, and further demands that the parties comply with their obligations under international law in relation to all persons they detain and respect their human rights; > 5. Reiterates its call for the full, rapid, safe, and unhindered humanitarian access into and throughout the entire Gaza Strip and for the urgent, continuous and sufficient provision of humanitarian assistance at scale to the Palestinian civilian population, including by facilitating the use of all available routes to and throughout the entire Gaza Strip, including border crossings, in accordance with international humanitarian law and its relevant resolutions; > 6. Demands the implementation of its resolutions 2712 (2023) and 2720 (2023) in full; > 7. Reiterates its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, consistent with international law and relevant UN resolutions, and in this regard stresses the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority; > 8. Emphasizes the importance of preventing further escalation in the region, and, in this regard, calls on all parties to exercise maximum restraint and calls on all those with influence on the parties to work toward this objective; > 9. Decides to remain actively seized of the matter. > >
Live Stream: Parliament of Ghana continues the Second Consideration Stage of "Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, 2021" (21 February 2024)
Live Stream of the Proceedings of Wednesday, 21st February, 2024 (10th Sitting of the 1st Meeting of the 4th Session of the 8th Parliament), discussing the "Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, 2021."
Excerpt:
> > > LGBTTQQIAAP+ and Related Activities > Prohibition of LGBTTQQIAAP+ and related activities > 6. (1) A person commits an offence if the person > (a) engages in a > (i) sexual intercourse between or among persons of the same sex; > (ii) sexual intercourse between a man and an animal or a woman and an animal; or > (iii) pansexual activity; > (b) marries or purports to marry a person who is of the same sex as that person; > (c) knowingly marries or purports to marry a person who has undergone gender or sex reassignment, except in the case of a person who has undergone a surgical procedure to correct a biological anomaly, including intersex; > (d) marries or purports to marry an animal; > (e) holds out as > (i) a lesbian, > (ii) a gay, > (iii) a transgender, > (iv) a transsexual, > (v) a queer, > (vi) a pansexual, > (vil) an ally, > (viii) a non-binary, or > (ix) any other sexual or gender identity that is contrary to the binary categories of male and female; > (f) provides or participates in the provision of > (i) asurgical procedure for sex or gender reassignment; or > (ii) any other procedure that is intended to create a sexual category other than the sexual category of a person assigned at birth except in the case of correcting a biological abnormality including intersex; or > (g) undergoes: > (i) a surgical procedure for sex or gender reassignment; or > (ii) any other procedure that is intended to create a sexual category other than the sexual category of the person assigned at birth except in the case of correcting a biological abnormality including intersex. > (2) A person who commits an offence under paragraph (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), or (g) of subsection (1) commits a second degree felony and is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not less than seven hundred and fifty penalty units and not more than five thousand penalty units or to a term of imprisonment of not less than three years and not more than five years or both. > (3) For purposes of this section, “sexual intercourse” occurs where > (a) a person penetrates the anus or mouth of another person with the penis of that person or other contraption; or > (b) a person, by use of any object or contraption, penetrates or stimulates the vagina or anus of another person; or > (c) a person, by use of the penis of the person or any other object or contraption, penetrates the anus or other bodily opening of an animal > for sexual gratification. > >
Bill record link: https://ir.parliament.gh/handle/123456789/3045?show=full
Sony Music Entertainment v. Cox Communications, Incorporated: US Court of Appeals reverses vicarious liability verdict and remand for a new trial on damages (20 February 2024)
Court docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/63148084/sony-music-entertainment-v-cox-communications-incorporated/
Excerpts:
> > > RUSHING, Circuit Judge: > > > > Defendant Cox Communications sells internet, telephone, and cable television service to 6 million homes and businesses across the United States. Plaintiffs—Sony Music Entertainment and numerous other record companies and music publishers—own some of the most popular copyrighted musical works of our time. Some users of Cox’s internet service infringed Plaintiffs’ copyrights by downloading or distributing songs over the internet without permission. Rather than sue those individuals, Plaintiffs sued Cox, seeking to hold it responsible for its customers’ copyright infringement. > > > > Federal law protects internet service providers from monetary liability for copyright infringement committed by users of their networks, but only if those service providers reasonably implement a policy to terminate repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances. In a prior case, our Court held that Cox had failed to reasonably implement an anti-piracy program and therefore did not qualify for the statutory safe harbor. > > > > This case proceeded to trial on two theories of secondary liability: vicarious and contributory copyright infringement. The jury found Cox liable for both willful contributory and vicarious infringement of 10,017 copyrighted works owned by Plaintiffs and awarded $1 billion in statutory damages. Cox appealed. > > > > We affirm the jury’s finding of willful contributory infringement. But we reverse the vicarious liability verdict and remand for a new trial on damages because Cox did not profit from its subscribers’ acts of infringement, a legal prerequisite for vicarious liability. > >
> > > the crux of the financial benefit inquiry is whether a causal relationship exists between the infringing activity and a financial benefit to the defendant. If copyright infringement draws customers to the defendant’s service or incentivizes them to pay more for their service, that financial benefit may be profit from infringement. See, e.g., EMI Christian Music Grp., Inc. v. MP3tunes, LLC, 844 F.3d 79, 99 (2d Cir. 2016). But in every case, the financial benefit to the defendant must flow directly from the third party’s acts of infringement to establish vicarious liability. See Grokster, 545 U.S. at 930 & n.9; Nelson-Salabes, 284 F.3d at 513. > > > > To prove vicarious liability, therefore, Sony had to show that Cox profited from its subscribers’ infringing download and distribution of Plaintiffs’ copyrighted songs. It did not. > > > > The district court thought it was enough that Cox repeatedly declined to terminate infringing subscribers’ internet service in order to continue collecting their monthly fees. Evidence showed that, when deciding whether to terminate a subscriber for repeat infringement, Cox considered the subscriber’s monthly payments. See, e.g., J.A. 1499 (“This customer will likely fail again, but let’s give him one more chan[c]e. [H]e pays 317.63 a month.”). To the district court, this demonstrated the requisite connection between the customers’ continued infringement and Cox’s financial gain. > > > > We disagree. The continued payment of monthly fees for internet service, even by repeat infringers, was not a financial benefit flowing directly from the copyright infringement itself. As Cox points out, subscribers paid a flat monthly fee for their internet access no matter what they did online. Indeed, Cox would receive the same monthly fees even if all of its subscribers stopped infringing. Cox’s financial interest in retaining subscriptions to its internet service did not give it a financial interest in its subscribers’ myriad online activities, whether acts of copyright infringement or any other unlawful acts. An internet service provider would necessarily lose money if it canceled subscriptions, but that demonstrates only that the service provider profits directly from the sale of internet access. Vicarious liability, on the other hand, demands proof that the defendant profits directly from the acts of infringement for which it is being held accountable. > > > > Sony responds that, even if we disagree with the district court, the jury heard other evidence of Cox’s direct financial interest in its subscribers’ copyright infringement. But none of Sony’s alternative theories supports vicarious liability here. > >
Snippet of Press Release from the Office of the Attorney General of Georgia, USA:
September 05, 2023
Carr: 61 Indicted in Fulton County in Atlanta Public Safety Training Center Investigation
Defendants charged with Racketeering, Domestic Terrorism
ATLANTA, GA – Attorney General Chris Carr today announced the indictment of 61 people in Fulton County following a multi-agency investigation into the violence that has occurred at the site of the future Atlanta Public Safety Training Center and other locations. All 61 defendants have been charged with Violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Several of the defendants are also facing separate charges of Domestic Terrorism, Attempted Arson in the First Degree, and Money Laundering. As alleged in the indictment, the defendants are members of Defend the Atlanta Forest, an anarchist, anti-police, and anti-business extremist organization. They are alleged to have conspired together to prevent the construction of the Atlanta Public Safety Training Center by conducting, coordinating, and organizing acts of violence, intimidation, and property destruction in Fulton County, elsewhere in the State of Georgia, and other states. Of the 61 defendants who have been indicted, only 13 are from Georgia.
“As this indictment shows, looking the other way when violence occurs is not an option in Georgia,” said Carr. “If you come to our state and shoot a police officer, throw Molotov cocktails at law enforcement, set fire to police vehicles, damage construction equipment, vandalize private homes and businesses, and terrorize their occupants, you can and will be held accountable. We will not waver when it comes to keeping people safe, enforcing the rule of law, and ensuring those who engage in criminal activity are vigorously pursued and aggressively prosecuted.”
This investigation was led by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) in partnership with the Atlanta Police Department (APD), the Georgia Department of Public Safety (DPS), the DeKalb County Police Department, the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, the Georgia Emergency Management and Homeland Security Agency, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
“The criminal acts of those named in this indictment have placed public safety personnel and members of the community in danger,” said GBI Director Chris Hosey. “This major step is a testament to the GBI’s commitment to protecting the citizens of Georgia. We will continue to work with the Georgia Attorney General’s Office and our local and federal partners to hold any person who seeks to harm the lives of others accountable.”
US Senate Bill 1409: Kids Online Safety Act
Summary:
> > > Reported to Senate (12/13/2023) > > > > Kids Online Safety Act > > > > This bill sets out requirements to protect minors from online harms. > > > > The requirements apply to covered platforms, which are applications or services (e.g., social networks) that connect to the internet and are likely to be used by minors. However, the bill exempts internet service providers, email services, educational institutions, and other specified entities from the requirements. > > > > Covered platforms must take reasonable measures in the design and operation of products or services used by minors to prevent and mitigate certain harms that may arise from that use (e.g., sexual exploitation and online bullying). > > > > Additionally, covered platforms must provide (1) minors with certain safeguards, such as settings that restrict access to minors' personal data; and (2) parents or guardians with tools to supervise minors' use of a platform, such as control of privacy and account settings. > > > > Covered platforms must also > > > > * disclose specified information, including details regarding the use of personalized recommendation systems and individual-specific advertising to minors; > * allow parents, guardians, minors, and schools to report certain harms; > * refrain from facilitating advertising of age-restricted products or services (e.g., tobacco and gambling) to minors; and > * annually report on foreseeable risks of harm to minors from using the platform. > > > > Additionally, the bill requires large (based on specified revenue, employment, or user criteria) websites, internet applications, and search engines (including social network sites) to meet certain requirements before using algorithms that prioritize information furnished to the user based on user-specific data. For example, such platforms must (1) provide users with notice that the website uses such algorithms, and (2) make available a version of the platform that uses algorithms that do not prioritize information based on user data. > > > > The bill provides for enforcement through the Federal Trade Commission and states. > > > > Further, the bill requires the commission to seek to contract with the National Academy of Sciences to study the risks of harm to minors by the use of social media and other online platforms. > > > > The bill establishes a council to advise on implementing the bill. It also requires guidance for market and product research focused on minors and an evaluation of options to verify a user's age. > >
West Virginia, USA Legislature: Removing bona fide schools, public libraries, and museums from the list of exemptions from criminal liability relating to distribution and display to minor of obscene m
Bill status tracking link: https://www.wvlegislature.gov/Bill\_Status/Bills\_history.cfm?input=4654&year=2024&sessiontype=RS&btype=bill
>
>
> A BILL to amend and reenact §61-8A-3 of the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, relating to removing bona fide schools, public libraries, and museums from the list of exemptions from criminal liability relating to distribution and display to minor of obscene matter.
>
>
>
> Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:
> ARTICLE 8A. PREPARATION, DISTRIBUTION OR EXHIBITION OF OBSCENE MATTER TO MINORS.
> §61-8A-3. Exemptions from criminal liability.
>
>
>
> The criminal provisions of §61-8A-2 of this code do not apply to:
>
>
>
> (a) A bona fide school, in the presentation of local or state approved curriculum;
>
>
>
> (b) A public library, or museum, which is displaying or distributing any obscene matter to a minor only when the minor was accompanied by his or her parent
>
>
>
> (c) (a) A licensed medical or mental health care provider, or judicial or law-enforcement officer, during the course of medical, psychiatric, or psychological treatment or judicial or law-enforcement activities;
>
>
>
> (d) (b) A person who did not know or have reason to know, and could not reasonably have learned, that the person to whom the obscene matter was distributed or displayed was a minor and who took reasonable measures to ascertain the identity and age of the minor;
>
>
>
> (e) (c) A person who routinely distributes obscene matter by the use of telephone, computer network or the Internet and who distributes such matter to any minor under the age of eighteen years after the person has taken reasonable measures to prevent access by minors to the obscene matter; or
>
>
>
> (f) (d) A radio or television station, cable television service or other telecommunications service regulated by the federal communications commission.
>
>
>
> NOTE: The purpose of this bill is to remove schools, museums, and public libraries from the exemption which protects these types of entities from prosecution for distribution and display to minor of an obscene matter.
>
>
>
> Strike-throughs indicate language that would be stricken from a heading or the present law and underscoring indicates new language that would be added.
>
>
La Corte Constitucional del Ecuador declara la constitucionalidad de eutanasia, 05 de febrero de 2024 | The Constitutional Court of Ecuador deems euthanasia constitutional, 5 February 2024
> > > Resumen: La Corte Constitucional resuelve la acción pública de inconstitucionalidad propuesta en contra del artículo 144 del Código Orgánico Integral Penal, que tipifica el homicidio simple. Al respecto, este Organismo declara la constitucionalidad condicionada del referido artículo y aclara que será constitucional siempre y cuando no sea sancionado (i) el médico que ejecute la conducta tipificada en el artículo 144 del COIP en el supuesto en el que (ii) una persona, expresando su consentimiento inequívoco, libre e informado (o a través de su representante cuando no pueda expresarlo), solicite acceder a un procedimiento de eutanasia activa (iii) por el padecimiento de sufrimiento intenso proveniente de una lesión necesariamente de carácter corporal, grave e irreversible o una enfermedad que sea grave e incurable. > > > > La Corte considera que el supuesto planteado se relaciona con los derechos a la vida digna y al libre desarrollo de la personalidad (autonomía), por lo que, tras efectuar un examen concluye que la vida admite excepciones a su inviolabilidad cuando busca proteger otros derechos. > > > > En el presente caso, se verifica que el supuesto examinado es incompatible con el derecho previsto en el artículo 66, número 2 -vida digna- de la CRE, pues este tiene dos dimensiones: la primera, entendida como subsistencia y, la segunda, como el conjunto de condiciones mínimas que permitan una vida decorosa, es decir, que concurran factores que permitan el alcance de los ideales de excelencia humana de cada persona. De igual forma, la Corte evidencia que el artículo impugnado en el supuesto abordado es contrario al derecho al libre desarrollo de la personalidad, contenido en el artículo 66 número 5 de la CRE, mismo que protege de manera general la capacidad de las personas para autodeterminarse, para configurar su propio proyecto de vida conforme a sus valores, creencias, su visión del mundo y las circunstancias que le rodean sin más limitaciones que los derechos de los demás. > >
International Court of Justice: Nicaragua requests permission to intervene in the proceedings under Article 62 of the Statute
Link to PDF of official press release in English.
Link to PDF of official press release in French.
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE Peace Palace, Carnegieplein 2, 2517 KJ The Hague, Netherlands Tel.: +31 (0)70 302 2323 Fax: +31 (0)70 364 9928 Website X YouTube LinkedIn Press Release Unofficial No. 2024/14 8 February 2024 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel) Nicaragua requests permission to intervene in the proceedings under Article 62 of the Statute THE HAGUE, 8 February 2024. On 23 January 2024, Nicaragua, referring to Article 62 of the Statute of the Court, filed in the Registry of the Court an Application for permission to intervene “as a party” in the case concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel). Pursuant to Article 62 of the Statute, whenever a State not party to a case considers that it has an interest of a legal nature which may be affected by the decision in the case, it may submit a request to the Court to be permitted to intervene. In its Application for permission to intervene, Nicaragua states that it “has interests of a legal nature that stem from the rights and obligations imposed by the Genocide Convention on all State Parties” and flow from “the universal character both of the condemnation of genocide and of the cooperation required ‘in order to liberate mankind from such an odious scourge’”. Nicaragua considers that the conduct of Israel is in “violation of its obligations under the Genocide Convention, including Articles I, III, IV, V and VI, read in conjunction with Article II”. Therefore, Nicaragua requests the Court to adjudge and declare: “(1) that the Republic of South Africa and the State of Israel each have a duty to act in accordance with their obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to the members of the Palestinian group, to take all reasonable measures within their power to prevent genocide; and (2) that the State of Israel: (a) has breached and continues to breach its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in particular the obligations provided under Article I, read in conjunction with Article II, and Articles III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d), III (e), IV, V and VI; (b) must cease forthwith any acts and measures in breach of those obligations, including such acts or measures which would be capable of killing or continuing to kill
- 2 - Palestinians, or causing or continuing to cause serious bodily or mental harm to Palestinians or deliberately inflicting on their group, or continuing to inflict on their group, conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, and fully respect its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in particular the obligations provided under Articles I, III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d), III (e), IV, V and VI; (c) must ensure that persons committing genocide, conspiring to commit genocide, directly and publicly inciting genocide, attempting to commit genocide and complicit in genocide contrary to Articles I, III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d) and III (e) are punished by a competent national or international tribunal, as required by Articles I, IV, V and VI; (d) to that end and in furtherance of those obligations arising under Articles I, IV, V and VI, must collect and conserve evidence and ensure, allow and/or not inhibit directly or indirectly the collection and conservation of evidence of genocidal acts committed against Palestinians in Gaza, including such members of the group displaced from Gaza; (e) must perform the obligations of reparation in the interest of Palestinian victims, including but not limited to allowing the safe and dignified return of forcibly displaced and/or abducted Palestinians to their homes, respect for their full human rights and protection against further discrimination, persecution, and other related acts, and provide for the reconstruction of what it has destroyed in Gaza, consistent with the obligation to prevent genocide under Article I; and (f) must offer assurances and guarantees of non-repetition of violations of the Genocide Convention, in particular the obligations provided under Articles I, III (a), III (b), III (c), III (d), III (e), IV, V and VI.” As the basis of jurisdiction between Nicaragua and the Parties to the present proceedings, Nicaragua invokes Article IX of the Genocide Convention. In accordance with Article 83 of the Rules of Court, South Africa and Israel have been invited to furnish written observations on Nicaragua’s Application for permission to intervene. The full text of Nicaragua’s Application for permission to intervene will be available on the Court’s website shortly.
---
History of the proceedings On 29 December 2023, South Africa filed an Application instituting proceedings against Israel concerning alleged violations by Israel of its obligations under the Genocide Convention in relation to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The Application also contained a request for the indication of provisional measures, pursuant to Article 41 of the Statute of the Court and Articles 73, 74 and 75 of the Rules of Court. The Applicant requested the Court to indicate provisional measures in order to “protect against further, severe and irreparable harm to the rights of the Palestinian people under the Genocide Convention”
- 3 - and “to ensure Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention not to engage in genocide, and to prevent and to punish genocide”. Public hearings on the request for the indication of provisional measures submitted by South Africa were held on Thursday 11 and Friday 12 January. On 26 January 2024, the Court delivered its Order on South Africa’s request. Earlier press releases relating to this case are available on the Court’s website.
---
Note: The Court’s press releases are prepared by its Registry for information purposes only and do not constitute official documents.
---
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations. It was established by the United Nations Charter in June 1945 and began its activities in April 1946. The Court is composed of 15 judges elected for a nine-year term by the General Assembly and the Security Council of the United Nations. The seat of the Court is at the Peace Palace in The Hague (Netherlands). The Court has a twofold role: first, to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States; and, second, to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by duly authorized United Nations organs and agencies of the system.
---
Information Department: Ms Monique Legerman, First Secretary of the Court, Head of Department: +31 (0)70 302 2336 Ms Joanne Moore, Information Officer: +31 (0)70 302 2337 Mr Avo Sevag Garabet, Associate Information Officer: +31 (0)70 302 2394 Email: [email protected]
FEBRUARY 8, 2024 (Columbus, Nebraska) — The Nebraska State Patrol is able to provide additional details on the Columbus Police Department officer-involved shooting that occurred Tuesday afternoon.
At approximately 1:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 6, Columbus police officers were conducting a welfare check following a report of potential self-harm at a residence in the 3600 block of 39th Avenue in Columbus. Officers contacted the subject, a 17-year-old male, inside the residence. The subject was in possession of a knife.
During the encounter, a Columbus police officer discharged their duty weapon, striking the subject. Another officer deployed a taser during the incident. The subject succumbed to injuries and was pronounced deceased at the scene.
The subject has been identified as Chase Ditter, 17, of Columbus.
The Columbus Police Department has requested the Nebraska State Patrol to investigate the incident. The NSP Special Investigations Team is conducting the in-custody death investigation.
The Columbus Police Department has placed both officers involved in the incident on administrative leave. The NSP investigation remains ongoing.
Columbus Nebraska Police Department: New Information Released in Columbus-PD Office-Involved Shooting (8 February 2024)
Columbus Nebraska Police Department, Columbus, Nebraska. 15 032 tykkäystä · 849 puhuu tästä · 150 oli täällä. Columbus Police Department 2330 14th Street Columbus, NE 68601 (402)564-3201 phone...
> > > FEBRUARY 8, 2024 (Columbus, Nebraska) — The Nebraska State Patrol is able to provide additional details on the Columbus Police Department officer-involved shooting that occurred Tuesday afternoon. > > > > At approximately 1:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 6, Columbus police officers were conducting a welfare check following a report of potential self-harm at a residence in the 3600 block of 39th Avenue in Columbus. Officers contacted the subject, a 17-year-old male, inside the residence. The subject was in possession of a knife. > > > > During the encounter, a Columbus police officer discharged their duty weapon, striking the subject. Another officer deployed a taser during the incident. The subject succumbed to injuries and was pronounced deceased at the scene. > > > > The subject has been identified as Chase Ditter, 17, of Columbus. > > > > The Columbus Police Department has requested the Nebraska State Patrol to investigate the incident. The NSP Special Investigations Team is conducting the in-custody death investigation. > > > > The Columbus Police Department has placed both officers involved in the incident on administrative leave. The NSP investigation remains ongoing. > >
Direct quotes from the actual report:
Several defenses are likely to create reasonable doubt as to such charges. For example, Mr. Biden could have found the classified Afghanistan documents at his Virginia home in 2017 and then forgotten about them soon after. This could convince some reasonable jurors that he did not retain them willfully. When Mr. Biden told his ghostwriter about finding ''all the classified stuff downstairs," his tone was matter-of-fact. For a person who had viewed classified documents nearly every day for eight years as vice president, including regularly in his home, finding classified documents at home less than a month after leaving office could have been an unremarkable and forgettable event. Notably, the classified Afghanistan documents did not come up again in Mr. Biden's dozens of hours of recorded conversations with the ghostwriter, or in his book. And the place where the Afghanistan documents were eventually found in Mr. Biden's Delaware garage-in a badly damaged box surrounded by household detritus-suggests the documents might have been forgotten.
In addition, Mr. Biden's memory was significantly limited, both during his recorded interviews with the ghostwriter in 2017, and in his interview with our office in 2023. And his cooperation with our investigation, including by reporting to the government that the Afghanistan documents were in his Delaware garage, will likely convince some jurors that he made an innocent mistake, rather than acting willfully-that is, with intent to break the law-as the statute requires.
But another inference the evidence permits is that Mr. Biden returned the binder of classified material to the personal aide because, after leaving office, Mr. Biden did not intend to retain any marked classified documents. As Mr. Biden said in his interview with our office, if he had found marked classified documents after the vice presidency, "I would have gotten rid of them. I would have gotten them back to their source.... I had no purpose for them, and I think it would be inappropriate for me to keep clearly classified documents." Some reasonable jurors may credit this statement and conclude that if Mr. Biden found the classified Afghanistan documents in the Virginia home, he forgot about them rather than willfully retaining them.
Mr. Biden's own words to Zwonitzer provide some support for this conclusion. In the recorded conversation when Mr. Biden told Zwonitzer he had "just found all the classified stuff downstairs," Mr. Biden's tone was remarkably casual. His sole reference to this discovery of classified documents was this brief aside. Mr. Biden did not sound surprised or concerned by the documents he referenced. While reasonable jurors could draw different conclusions from Mr. Biden's seeming nonchalance, one conclusion is that if Mr. Biden discovered classified documents, it simply was not significant to him and was something he could have quickly forgotten.
After all, the Afghanistan documents and the 2009 troop surge played no role in Promise Me, Dad, the book Mr. Biden wrote with Zwonitzer in early 2017. There is no reason to believe Mr. Biden intended to discuss the 2009 Afghanistan troop debate in his book, which, as explained in Chapter Five, covered his experiences in 2014 and 2015. In dozens of hours of recorded conversations with Zwonitzer in 2016 and 2017, when Mr. Biden talked about a vast array of topics, the Afghanistan documents never came up again. This may suggest that after February 16, 2017, the documents were simply not on Mr. Biden's mind.
Mr. Biden's memory also appeared to have significant limitations-both at the time he spoke to Zwonitzer in 2017, as evidenced by their recorded conversations, and today, as evidenced by his recorded interview with our office. Mr. Biden's recorded conversations with Zwonitzer from 2017 are often painfully slow, with Mr. Biden struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries.
Official Indictment of 61 People in Fulton County in Atlanta Public Safety Training Center Investigation
Excerpt:
> > > b. Defend the Atlanta Forest > > > > Defend the Atlanta Forest is a self-identified coalition and enterprise of militant anarchists, eco-activists, and community organizers. Based in Atlanta, this anarchist, anti-police, and environmental activism organization coordinates, advertises, and conducts "direct action" designed to prevent the construction of the Atlanta Police Public Safety Training Center and Shadowbox Studios (previously known as Blackhall Studios) and promote anarchist ideas. This self-proclaimed "direct action" has included vandalizing of private property, arson, destruction of government property, attacks on utility workers, attacks on law enforcement, attacks on private citizens, and gun violence. The purpose of these actions is to prevent the construction of the Atlanta Police Public Safety Training Center and a movie studio, all while promoting virulent anarchist ideals. > >
Gobierno de Nicaragua: Impedir y detener el genocidio en Palestina
> > > NOTA DE PRENSA > IMPEDIR Y DETENER EL GENOCIDIO EN PALESTINA > > > > El Gobierno de Reconciliación y Unidad Nacional informa al Pueblo de Nicaragua y a la Comunidad Internacional que ha notificado a los gobiernos del Reino Unido, Alemania, Países Bajos y Canadá su decisión de responsabilizarlos conforme al Derecho Internacional por violaciones flagrantes y sistemáticas a la Convención para la Prevención y la Sanción del Delito de Genocidio, el Derecho Internacional Humanitario y el Derecho Consuetudinario, incluido el Derecho sobre la ocupación en los Territorios Palestinos Ocupados, en particular la Franja de Gaza. > > > > En este sentido, en una nota verbal enviada a estos Gobiernos, Nicaragua recordó que los hechos y circunstancias de las acciones israelíes en y contra los palestinos llevaron a la Corte Internacional de Justicia a concluir el 26 de Enero de 2024 “que al menos algunos de los Derechos reclamados por Sudáfrica y para las cuales busca protección son plausibles. Este es el caso con respecto al derecho de los palestinos en Gaza a ser protegidos contra actos de genocidio y actos prohibidos relacionados identificados en el artículo III”. > > > > Aunque la Orden sobre Medidas Provisionales de la Corte no es una sentencia sobre el fondo, sin embargo, basándose en las pruebas disponibles públicamente, la Corte consideró plausible que la Convención sobre Genocidio haya sido y esté siendo violada por Israel. Si a juicio del Tribunal Supremo del mundo es plausible que se esté produciendo un genocidio en la Franja de Gaza, no puede ser de otra manera a juicio de la comunidad internacional, que también es dramáticamente consciente de los mismos hechos que llevaron al Tribunal a esa conclusión. > > > > La obligación de prevenir el genocidio surge y comienza cuando existe riesgo de que ocurra; de hecho, cuando es plausible que esté ocurriendo o pueda ocurrir. Esta probabilidad está ahora más allá de toda duda y controversia. > > > > En ese sentido, Nicaragua ha instado a los Gobiernos del Reino Unido, Alemania, Países Bajos y Canadá a detener de inmediato el suministro de armas, municiones, tecnología y/o componentes a Israel, ya que es plausible que hayan sido utilizados para facilitar o cometer violaciones de la Convención sobre Genocidio, incluidos, entre otros, actos de genocidio, intento de genocidio, complicidad en genocidio y conspiración para cometer genocidio. > > > > Lamentablemente, el suministro de armas militares y otro tipo de asistencia que pueda utilizarse en el genocidio que está teniendo lugar no se ha detenido ni disminuido desde que comenzaron los ataques genocidas de Israel contra la Franja de Gaza en octubre de 2023, y en algunos casos, de hecho, ha aumentado. Nicaragua ha recordado a estos gobiernos que “la obligación de un Estado de prevenir, y el correspondiente deber de actuar, surgen en el instante en que el Estado tiene conocimiento, o normalmente debería haber tenido conocimiento, de la existencia de un riesgo grave de que se cometa genocidio”. > Además, Nicaragua ha advertido que los recientes anuncios de estos gobiernos sobre la suspensión de los fondos a la Agencia de Obras Públicas y Socorro de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados de Palestina en el Cercano Oriente (UNRWA por sus siglas en inglés) demuestran aún más que en el escenario actual, los Gobiernos del Reino Unido, Alemania, los Países Bajos y Canadá continúan ignorando sus obligaciones y facilitando activamente las violaciones de las normas del Derecho Internacional por parte de Israel en perjuicio grave e inmediato del Pueblo Palestino, en particular de los habitantes de Gaza, y de la Comunidad Internacional en su conjunto. En especial, Nicaragua ha subrayado que este acto contribuye al castigo colectivo de los palestinos y al aparente objetivo de obligar a la población palestina a abandonar los Territorios Palestinos Ocupados, particularmente Gaza, e impedir el ejercicio de su Derecho a la Autodeterminación. > > > > En consecuencia, Nicaragua ha notificado por escrito a estos gobiernos que adoptará todas las medidas que considere apropiadas de conformidad con el Derecho Internacional, incluido el recurso a la Corte Internacional de Justicia, para garantizar el respeto de estos textos internacionales fundamentales y del Derecho Internacional Consuetudinario. > > > > El Gobierno de Reconciliación y Unidad Nacional reafirma su firme compromiso con el Estado de Derecho a Nivel Internacional y la solución pacífica de controversias entre Estados. > Managua, 1° de Febrero de 2024 > Gobierno de Reconciliación y Unidad Nacional > República de Nicaragua > >
Versión en inglés: https://radionicaragua.com.ni/nacionales/gobierno-de-nicaragua-impedir-y-detener-el-genocidio-en-palestina/
> > > PRESS RELEASE > PREVENT AND STOP THE GENOCIDE IN PALESTINE > > > > The Government of Reconciliation and National Unity informs the people of Nicaragua and the international community that it has notified the governments of the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands and Canada of its decision to hold them responsible under international law for gross and systematic violations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, international humanitarian law and customary law, including the law of occupation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, in particular the Gaza Strip. > > > > In this vein, in a note verbal sent to these governments, Nicaragua recalled that the facts and circumstances of the Israeli actions in and against the Palestinians led the International Court of Justice to conclude on 26 January 2024 “that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible. This is the case with respect to the right of the Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from acts of genocide and related prohibited acts identified in Article III”. > > > > Although the Order on Provisional Measures of the Court is not a judgment on the merits, nevertheless on the evidence publicly available, the Court found it plausible that the Genocide convention has been and is being violated by Israel. If genocide is plausibly occurring in the Gaza Strip in the judgment of the highest world Court, it cannot be otherwise in the judgment of the international community that is also dramatically aware of the same facts that led the Court to that conclusion. > > > > The obligation to prevent genocide arises and begins when there is a risk of it occurring; in fact, when it is plausible that it is occurring or might occur. This plausibility in now beyond doubt and dispute. > > > > In that sense, Nicaragua has urged the governments of the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands and Canada to immediately halt the supply of arms, ammunitions, technology and/or components to Israel as it is plausible they might have been use to facilitate or commit violations of the Genocide Convention, including but not limited to acts of genocide, attempted genocide, complicity in genocide and conspiracy to commit genocide. > > > > Unfortunately, the provision of military weapons and other assistance capable of being used in the genocide taking place has not stopped or diminished since the genocidal attacks of Israel on the Gaza Strip began in October 2023, and in some cases has indeed increased. Nicaragua has reminded these governments that “a State’s obligation to prevent, and the corresponding duty to act, arise at the instant that the State learns of, or should normally have learned of, the existence of a serious risk that genocide will be committed”. > > > > Furthermore, Nicaragua has warned that the recent announcements by these governments on the suspension of the funds to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) further exposes that in the present scenario, the Governments of the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands and Canada continue to disregard their obligations, and to actively facilitate violations of the rules of international law by Israel to the severe and immediate prejudice of the Palestinian people, particularly Gazans, and the international community as a whole. In particular, Nicaragua has underscored that this act contributes to the collective punishment of the Palestinians and to the apparent objective of forcing the Palestinian population to leave the Occupied Palestinian Territories, particularly Gaza, and preventing the exercise of their right to self-determination. > > > > Consequently, Nicaragua has given written notice to these governments that it will adopt all measures it considers appropriate in accordance with international law, including recourse to the International Court of Justice, to guarantee respect for these fundamental international texts and customary international law. > > > > The Government of Reconciliation and National Unity reaffirms its firm commitment to the Rule of Law at the International Level and the peaceful settlement of disputes between States. > > > > Managua, 1 February 2024 > Government of Reconciliation and National Unity > Republic of Nicaragua > >
Report of the Special Counsel on the Investigation Into Unauthorized Removal, Retention, and Disclosure of Classified Documents Discovered at Locations Including the Penn Biden Center and the Delaware
Excerpt:
> > > EXECUTIVE SUMMARY > > > > We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter. We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president. > > > > Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen. These materials included (1) marked classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, and (2) notebooks containing Mr. Biden's handwritten entries about issues of national security and foreign policy implicating sensitive intelligence sources and methods. FBI agents recovered these materials from the garage, offices, and basement den in Mr. Biden's Wilmington, Delaware home. > > > > However, for the reasons summarized below, we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecution of Mr. Biden is also unwarranted based on our consideration of the aggravating and mitigating factors set forth in the Department of Justice's Principles of Federal Prosecution. For these reasons, we decline prosecution of Mr. Biden. > > > --- > > > The classified documents and other materials recovered in this case spanned Mr. Biden's career in national public life. During that career, Mr. Biden has long seen himself as a historic figure. Elected to the Senate at age twenty-nine, he considered running for president as early as 1980 and did so in 1988, 2008, and 2020. He believed his record during decades in the Senate made him worthy of the presidency, and he collected papers and artifacts related to significant issues and events in his career. He used these materials to write memoirs published in 2007 and 2017, to document his legacy, and to cite as evidence that he was a man of presidential timber. > > > > In 2009, then-Vice President Biden strongly opposed the military's plans to send more troops to Afghanistan. U.S. policy in Afghanistan was deeply important to Mr. Biden, and he labored to dissuade President Obama from escalating America's involvement there and repeating what Mr. Biden believed was a mistake akin to Vietnam. Despite Mr. Biden's advice, President Obama ordered a surge of additional U.S. troops, and Mr. Biden's views endured sharp criticism from others within and outside of the administration. But he always believed history would prove him right. He retained materials documenting his opposition to the troop surge, including a classified handwritten memo he sent President Obama over the 2009 Thanksgiving holiday, and related marked classified documents. FBI agents recovered these materials from Mr. Biden's Delaware garage and home office in December 2022 and January 2023. > > > > Also, during his eight years as vice president, Mr. Biden regularly wrote notes by hand in notebooks. Some of these notes related to classified subjects, including the President's Daily Brief and National Security Council meetings, and some of the notes are themselves classified. After the vice presidency, Mr. Biden kept these classified notebooks in unsecured and unauthorized spaces at his Virginia and Delaware homes and used some of the notebooks as reference material for his second memoir, Promise Me, Dad, which was published in 2017. To our knowledge, no one has identified any classified information published in Promise Me, Dad, but Mr. Biden shared information, including some classified information, from those notebooks with his ghostwriter. FBI agents recovered the notebooks from the office and basement den in Mr. Biden's Delaware home in January 2023. > >