Russian court remands last of Greenpeace Arctic oil protesters

* Russian court extends detention of 8 activists

* 30 people accused of piracy, could face years in jail

* Greenpeace sees no signs of Kremlin shifting position

By Alexei Anishchuk

MOSCOW, Sept 29 (Reuters) - A Russian court has ordered eight remaining Greenpeace activists be held in custody for two months over a protest against Arctic offshore drilling, the environment advocacy group said on Sunday, dashing any hope some might be released quickly.

Authorities detained all 30 members of the pressure group who were aboard icebreaker the Arctic Sunrise when they broke up attempts to scale state-run Gazprom's Prirazlomnaya offshore oil platform on Sept. 18.

Of those, 22 people, including a freelance photographer and crew members had already been remanded until Nov. 24 while officials investigate charges of piracy which Greenpeace denies.

Piracy is punishable with up to 15 years of jail in Russia, although President Vladimir Putin said last week that the activists were clearly not pirates but had broken international law, suggesting they might end up facing less severe charges.

Greenpeace, which has described court proceedings as reminiscent of Soviet-era scare tactics, sees little sign of a shift from the Kremlin.

"From what we are seeing today in court in Murmansk, where eight more people were ordered to be held in custody for two months, nothing has altered the position of the authorities," head of the group's energy unit Vladimir Chuprov said in emailed comments.

"There was no assault, it was a peaceful protest of which (we) had warned the authorities," one of the activists, Dmitry Litvinov, told the court from an iron cage in a Murmansk courtroom.

Finnish activist Sini Saarela, one of the two people attempting to climb the platform, denied the charges of piracy.

"I am not a pirate," she said in the courtroom according to a Greenpeace Twitter account, @gp_sunrise. "Drilling for oil in ice is a tremendous threat to the environment all over the world."

Greenpeace says scientific evidence shows any oil spill from Prirazlomnaya would affect more than 3,000 miles (4,800 km) of Russia's coastline.

Russia sees the Arctic as its vital area of economic interest and Putin has promised to increase Russia's military presence in the region. (Reporting by Alexei Anishchuk; editing by Patrick Graham)

View the original article here

Egypt sends journalist to military court for 'aiding militants'

CAIRO | Wed Sep 11, 2013 1:05pm EDT

CAIRO (Reuters) - An army prosecutor sent an Egyptian journalist to a military court on Wednesday for allegedly publishing false news and tipping Islamist militants to the location of troops in the Sinai region bordering on Israel, an army statement said.

Ahmed Abu Deraa of the privately owned al-Masry al-Youm daily was charged with "harming national security by providing militants with locations of security forces in Sinai", according to a statement sent to the newspaper and seen by Reuters.

The newspaper has called for his release and provided him with a lawyer, who could not be reached for comment on the case.

A colleague of Abu Deraa, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on behalf of the newspaper, said the reporter was accused of spreading false news in an interview with a private television station and in Twitter messages.

Since the army overthrew elected Islamist President Mohamed Mursi in July, civil rights groups have voiced fears of a return to the authoritarian era of former President Hosni Mubarak, who was ousted by a pro-democracy uprising in 2011.

His rule was marked by human rights' abuses and the use of military tribunals to prosecute activists, journalists and political opponents.

Abu Deraa was arrested earlier this month in north Sinai, where militants have stepped up attacks since Mursi's removal.

The army launched an offensive against Islamist militants in the lawless peninsula this week involving dozens of tanks as well as armored vehicles and attack helicopters. At least 30 people were killed or wounded and nine arrested.

Six army officers were killed on Wednesday in two car bomb explosions near military units in Sinai.

Another 10 soldiers and seven civilians were wounded in the attacks that took place in the border town of Rafah, adjoining the Palestinian Gaza Strip.

(Reporting and writing by Yasmine Saleh; Editing by Paul Taylor)

View the original article here

Kenyan broadcaster tells court he did not incite vote violence

By Thomas Escritt

AMSTERDAM | Wed Sep 11, 2013 11:50am EDT

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - A Kenyan broadcaster described as the mouthpiece of the deputy president denied helping incite a post-election bloodbath, telling the International Criminal Court on Wednesday he was a deeply religious, law-abiding man.

Joshua arap Sang is charged with crimes against humanity relating to the violence, alongside Deputy President William Ruto and President Uhuru Kenyatta, in cases some Kenyans fear could reignite the political strife they have struggled to put behind them.

Prosecutors say Sang, 38, used his radio show to send out coded messages encouraging members of his and Ruto's Kalenjin tribe to attack rivals after disputed elections at the end of 2007.

The violence which continued into 2008 killed more than 1,000 people and drove hundreds of thousands from their homes in East Africa's biggest economy.

The cases have divided public opinion in Kenya where many have accused the court of unfairly targeting African leaders. That perception has driven primarily symbolic parliamentary and senate votes calling for Kenya to withdraw from the ICC.

"In my entire life, I've never stood before any court," Sang said, rising to speak over the objections of the prosecution, who said they expected only his lawyer to give an opening statement. Judges overruled the objection.

"I am a law-abiding person. I've lived my life as a Christian, with all the Christian values," he said.

Chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda said Sang's messages on Nairobi radio station Kass FM were meant to coordinate violent attacks in the Rift Valley region.

"The main mouthpiece used by Mr Ruto to spread his message, was his co-accused Joshua arap Sang," she said.

Both Ruto and Sang pleaded not guilty to the charges at the trial opening on Tuesday.

Ruto's lawyer Karim Khan gave a fiery speech that appeared to be aimed at a Kenyan audience back home, and said prosecutors had been misled by tainted evidence and false testimony.

Kenyatta will come to court to defend himself against similar charges in a separate trial that starts in November, and will be the first serving head of state to go on trial before an international court.

"WOULD I BE SO SILLY?"

Though Kenyatta, the son of the country's founding father, was in a rival political camp to Ruto's during the crisis, the two reconciled after the ICC brought charges against them, and they won this year's national elections on a joint ticket.

The Kenyan trials are seen as a test for the ICC, which after 10 years has only secured one conviction and brought charges only against Africans.

The cases have also posed challenges to prosecutors, who have had to contend with the loss of some of their key witnesses over the course of a three-year investigation. Chief prosecutor Bensouda said the witnesses had been intimidated into withdrawing.

Sang said the charges that he coordinated attacks against members of the Kikuyu tribe in the Rift Valley town of Eldoret made no sense, as his own wife lived in a Kikuyu house in the same town.

"Would I be so silly, so stupid as not to be concerned about my family?" Sang asked.

Joseph Kigen-Katwa, his lawyer, said all the witnesses against Sang were linked to Kenya's Party of National Unity, a rival party to Ruto's Orange Democratic Party led by former prime minister Raila Odinga.

In Eldoret, 300 km (190 miles) northwest of Nairobi, locals followed the proceedings by television on Wednesday.

"This case is causing us unnecessary anxiety. People obviously want to be informed of what is unfolding because the outcome will affect our relations with other neighbors within the country," said Joseph Kandie, 57, a Kalenjin farmer.

"Let's wait and see. What Kenyans want is justice," said 40-year-old mechanic Alfred Onyango.

"If Sang is innocent as he says, then he will be set free. Above all, he now has a chance to clear his name and set the record straight. But peace is what we call for even as the cases continue."

The trial of Ruto and Sang was adjourned after Sang finished speaking. The first prosecution witness, who had been due to testify on Wednesday, will now attend court on Tuesday.

(Additional reporting by James Macharia in Nairobi; Editing by Sara Webb and Andrew Heavens)

View the original article here

German court rules Muslim girls must join swimming classes

By Madeline Chambers

BERLIN | Wed Sep 11, 2013 2:08pm EDT

BERLIN (Reuters) - A German court ruled on Wednesday that Muslim girls must take part in school swimming lessons with boys, in a landmark decision that touches on the sensitive relationship between religion and the state.

The decision by Germany's top court for public and administrative disputes signals that the state's constitutional obligation to educate children can take precedence over customs and practices linked to an individual's religious beliefs.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her center-right government have sought dialogue with the country's roughly four-millions Muslims, but have also said they must make an effort to integrate and learn German.

The court said Muslim schoolgirls could not be exempted from swimming lessons, provided they were allowed to wear so-called 'burkinis', full-body swimsuits worn by many Muslim women which leave only the face, hands and feet exposed.

The plaintiff was a Muslim girl, originally from Morocco, who goes to school in the western state of Hesse. Her parents have tried for several years to stop her from joining swimming lessons with boys. She was 11 years old when the case started.

"The plaintiff has not made sufficiently clear that ... taking part in co-educational swimming lessons with a burkini breaches Muslim rules on clothing," said the Federal Administrative Court in Leipzig, rejecting her appeal.

Two courts in Hesse had already rejected her bid to be exempted from swimming lessons.

However, the girl's lawyer argued that she was embarrassed to see boys wearing nothing but swimming trunks.

"The Koran not only forbids being seen by others in light clothing but she herself should not see boys and girls with (swimsuits) on," Klaus Meissner, her lawyer, was quoted in German media as saying before the hearing.

The question of Muslim girls taking part in physical education and swimming lessons has prompted legal disputes in several European countries in recent years, highlighting the challenge of accommodating different religious beliefs.

German Islamic groups say they are not against burkinis.

"From our point of view, a full body swimsuit is appropriate and acceptable in Islam. However, freedom of belief and conscience should be respected," Aiman Mazyek, head of Germany's Central Council of Muslims, told German radio.

In May, the Swiss Supreme Court rejected a Muslim family's case against a school rule that their daughter had to take part in swimming classes and could not wear a burkini.

In staunchly secular France, which has banned religious dress such as Muslim headscarves and Jewish skullcaps as well as large Christian crosses in state schools, some public swimming pools have banned burkinis.

(Additional reporting by Tom Heneghan, editing by Noah Barkin)

View the original article here

Gene Patents Spark Debate in High Court

Register Today

Earn Free CME Credits by reading the latest medical news in your specialty.

Sign Up

By David Pittman, Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today

WASHINGTON -- Supreme Court justices lobbed hard questions Monday about whether a company could patent isolated human genes in a case that looms large in the personalized medicine arena.

During arguments before the court, several justices expressed doubt that Myriad Genetics could rightfully patent segments of human genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, genes in which mutations are indications of increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer.

Products of nature aren't patentable. Only inventions are, but Salt Lake City-based Myriad argued that because the genes have been isolated from the body, they are no longer a product of nature and can be patented.

"Now, yes, you can have a patent on the process of extracting that small part, but I don't understand how a small part of something bigger isn't obvious," Chief Justice John Roberts said.

Meanwhile, Myriad can stop others from making, using, selling, and offering to sell genetic testing to determine if an individual has such a genetic mutation.

A number of organizations including those led by physicians, researchers, clinicians, and other health professions were initially involved in the case.

"There might be a million things you can do with the BRCA genes, but nobody but Myriad is allowed to look at it and that's impeding science rather than advancing it," Christopher Hansen, who argued against Myriad, said.

A district court in 2010 ruled the patents invalid because they were products of nature. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2011 disagreed, setting up the case for the Supreme Court.

The Federal Circuit likened Myriad's case to that of a baseball bat. A tree isn't patent eligible, but a bat -- once extracted from the tree and carved -- is eligible.

Roberts disagreed with that analogy. "The baseball bat is quite different," Roberts said. "You don't look at a tree and say, 'well, I've cut the branch here and cut it here and all of a sudden I've got a baseball bat.' You have to invent it, if you will."

Justices repeatedly turned to the analogy of extracting a molecule from a tree leaf that is known for medicinal use. The leaf itself is a product of nature and not patentable, but the extracted molecule may be, Justice Samuel Alito said, seeming to support Myriad.

"The isolated DNA has a very different function than the DNA as it exists in your body," he added, just like the extracted molecule and the leaf. "And although the chemical composition may not be different, it certainly is in a different form."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor took a different tact and said the genes might be obvious -- not novel -- and therefore not patentable, which is a different argument from saying the genes are found in nature and not patent eligible.

Justice Stephen Breyer said he supported allowing companies like Myriad to be able to patent the process by which they find and extract certain gene segments -- just not genes themselves.

"It's important to keep products of nature free of the restrictions that patents there are," Breyer said.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has issued thousand of patents similar to that of Myriad's BRCA1 and BRCA2 and the company argued that a ruling against it could mean less investment in the field if they and others can't protect their work -- an argument justices questioned.

"What does Myriad get out of this deal? Why shouldn't we worry that Myriad or companies like it will just say, well, you know, we're not going to do this work anymore?" Justice Elena Kagan asked.

The High Court could rule in the case -- Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics -- before its current term ends in late June.

David Pittman

David Pittman is MedPage Today’s Washington Correspondent, following the intersection of policy and healthcare. He covers Congress, FDA, and other health agencies in Washington, as well as major healthcare events. David holds bachelors’ degrees in journalism and chemistry from the University of Georgia and previously worked at the Amarillo Globe-News in Texas, Chemical & Engineering News and most recently FDAnews.

Receive a digest of the day's essential medical news delivered to your inbox Sign Up Advertising Notice

This Site and third parties who place advertisements on this Site may collect and use information about your visits to this Site and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like to obtain more information about these advertising practices and to make choices about online behavioral advertising, please

View the original article here

U.S. court OKs Lehman settlements to free up $15 billion for customers

* Resolves Lehman brokerage's disputes with parent, European arm

* Frees up funds to repay institutional customers of brokerage

By Nick Brown

NEW YORK, April 16 (Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Tuesday approved a set of settlements among Lehman Brothers entities that will allow the company's defunct brokerage to pay back about $15 billion in customer claims.

The intercompany claims had been the final obstacles keeping James Giddens, the trustee recovering money for the broker's customers, from making full payouts to brokerage customers.

While individual retail customers were made whole shortly after Lehman's collapse in 2008, hundreds of affiliate, institutional and hedge fund customers of the brokerage have been waiting for their money.

The settlements, reached last year, were greenlighted by Judge James Peck at a hearing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan. This was a "milestone" moment in a "complex" bankruptcy, Giddens said in a statement.

The deals resolve a pair of disputes, one between Lehman's brokerage and its parent entity, the other between the brokerage and the company's European arm. The parent will receive a $2.3 billion customer claim, down from the $19.9 billion it had originally sought, and a $14 billion lower-priority unsecured claims against the brokerage.

The European unit will receive a $9 billion customer claim, down from the $24 billion it initially asserted, and a $4 billion unsecured claim.

The deals free up about $15 billion for Giddens to pay back to customers. He said he expected payouts to begin as soon as the court's orders are final. The settlement with Lehman's European arm still needs approval from a British court, where a hearing is slated for May 1.

Holders of unsecured claims will be partially repaid from whatever is left after customer claims are paid out.

Lehman filed the largest-ever U.S. bankruptcy on Sept. 15, 2008, with $639 billion in assets. It is in the midst of repaying about $65 billion to creditors under a liquidation plan approved in late 2011.

Its brokerage was liquidated separately under the Securities Investor Protection Act, or SIPA, which governs the wind-down of failed securities brokers. Most of its assets were sold to Barclays PLC.

"In the face of enormous complexity and unique legal challenges, the SIPA framework to protect customer's property worked as designed," Giddens said in the statement.

Spokeswomen for the Lehman parent and the European unit had no immediate comment on the ruling.

In a statement released earlier this week, Lehman's European unit credited the settlement as a main reason it is forecasting substantial or full repayment for its unsecured creditors.

"To be able to advise ordinary unsecured creditors that we now have a reasonable chance of eventually repaying their claims in full, marks a significant milestone," Tony Lomas, one of the administrators liquidating the European arm, said in the statement.

The brokerage liquidation is In re Lehman Brothers Inc, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York, No. 08-1420.

The Lehman bankruptcy is In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, in the same court, No. 08-13555.

View the original article here