The Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC, informs that Members of Congress are calling for laws in the United States that would compel Internet service providers and telecom companies to store information about their customers for months or years and make those records available to the police upon request...

To date, law enforcement has not been able to show that retaining all users' data helps to solve criminal cases. Traffic data is seldom essential in criminal investigations and data retained for longer than 6 months is rarely useful.

Retaining all customer data could also raise serious security and privacy risks..."

"In December 2005, the New York Times reported that President Bush secretly issued an executive order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct warrantless surveillance of international telephone and Internet communications on American soil. President Bush acknowledged the existence of the NSA surveillance program and vowed that its activities would continue.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center - EPIC- submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the NSA and four Department of Justice components just hours after the existence of the warrantless surveillance program was first reported. Noting the extraordinary public interest in the program — and its potential illegality — EPIC asked the agencies to expedite the processing of the requests...

Documents obtained by EPIC earlier in March 2006, through the FOIA litigation, reveal that a former top official in the Justice Department doubted that the domestic surveillace program was allowed under the Authorization for Use of Military Force Resolution..."

"On 16th December 2005 an Order of the Ministry of the Presidency ("ORDEN PRE/3945/2005") was published in the Spanish Official Gazette establishing the regulatory basis for the provision of subsidies for activities relating to the victims of the civil war and of Francoism.

Article 5 of the said Order provides: "The following projects may be eligible for subsidies, details of which will be specified in the corresponding official announcements: Investigation, exhumation and identification of persons who disappeared violently during the civil war or during the subsequent political repression and whose whereabouts are unknown, carried out under the responsibility of individuals or groups of individuals who claim a legitimate interest".

In response to the above Order, Equipo Nizkor and several Spanish associations of victims of Francoism have released a communique in which they assert that these specific activities are part of the legal responsibility of the State and cannot be delegated or sub-contracted to individuals or groups of individuals without violating the existing law as well international and European norms...

"On the occasion of Human Rights Day, we express alarm at attempts by many States to circumvent provisions of international human rights law by giving new names to old practices. Whereas international instruments stress that human rights are at the foundation of any democratic society, more and more frequently they are portrayed as an obstacle to government efforts to guarantee security. This trend is illustrated by debates on the absolute prohibition of torture: a ban that recently had seemed an undisputed cornerstone of human rights law, anchored in numerous international legal instruments, but also accepted as a principle of jus cogens...

"We are determined, in the framework of our respective mandates, to continue our work as defenders of all the human rights of all persons. Looking to the values enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and other UN instruments, we reject the artificial opposition between human rights and national security. Indeed, there can be no security without respect for human rights..."

"When the Bush administration rewrote the rules for dealing with prisoners after 9/11, needlessly scrapping the Geneva Conventions and American law, it ignored the objections of lawyers for the armed services. Now, heedless of the lessons of Abu Ghraib, the civilians are once again running over the people in uniform. Tim Golden and Eric Schmitt reported yesterday in The Times that the administration is blocking the Pentagon from adopting the language of the Geneva Conventions to set rules for handling prisoners in the so-called war on terror...

Dana Priest reports in The Washington Post that even the Central Intelligence Agency's clandestine operators are getting nervous about the network of secret prisons they have around the world - including, of all places, at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe."

"Human Rights Watch has conducted independent research on the existence of secret detention locations that corroborates the Washington Post's allegations that there were detention facilities in Eastern Europe." Specifically, Human Rights Watch "have collected information that CIA airplanes traveling from Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004 made direct flights to remote airfields in Poland and Romania."

In turn, On November 7th. 2005, the Legal Affairs Committee of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) appointed its Chairperson Dick Marty (from Switzerland, member of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe) as rapporteur to examine the subject of alleged secret CIA detention centres...

"The Bush Administration, through an amendment introduced by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, has successfully stripped federal courts of jurisdiction to hear applications for habeas corpus brought by those unilaterally declared enemy combatants without any process and held by the U.S. indefinitely throughout the world and even in the United States.

This was accomplished by means of a last minute amendment to the Military Authorization Bill, brought up on the floor of the Senate without committee deliberations and virtually no advance warning to the American people that it was happening.

It was not only human rights groups like the Center for Constitutional Rights, but many in the military or retired from the military who opposed the Graham amendment: Judge John Gibbons, who argued the landmark case Rasul v. Bush before the Supreme Court; John Hutson, Dean of Franklin Pierce Law Center and former Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy, and the National Institute for Military Justice, among others, wrote open letters to the Senate to oppose the dismantling of habeas corpus..."

On November 2, 2005, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights extended precautionary measures for the men being held indefinitely at Guantánamo Bay by the U.S. government.

Attorneys from the International Human Rights Clinic at American University's Washington College of Law and the Center for Constitutional Rights had a hearing before the Commission on October 20th.

The Commission's measures included requests:

• that the U.S. government ensure the detainees at Guantánamo are not transferred to countries where there are substantial grounds for believing they would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other mistreatment;
• that the U.S., in accordance with international law, not permit any statement obtained under torture to be used in a legal proceeding;
• that the government investigate and prosecute instances of abuse and torture, which does not mean letting the Department of Defense continue to investigate itself; and
• to have the legal status of the Guantánamo detainees determined by a competent tribunal, which has not been adequately addressed by the military tribunals or the habeas corpus proceedings to date.

The Commission on Human Rights concluded its annual session for 2005 on April 22nd. 2005, after having debated a wide range of human rights issues under its agenda items from crosscutting thematic issues, to country situations, to the organization of its work...

With regard to the proposed reform of the Secretary-General in the area of human rights, the Commission, while taking into account the report of the Secretary-General, decided to establish an open-ended Working Group which would convene a five-day inter-sessional meeting in June 2005 to reflect on the recommendations on human rights contained in the report of the Secretary-General.

In his report on UN reform entitled, "In larger freedom: towards development, security and human rights for all", dated March 21, 2005, Secretary-General Kofi Annan makes a series of recommendations, which include the replacement of the Commission on Human Rights with a smaller standing "Human Rights Council"...

On 28 August 2004, 160 lawyers from around the world, meeting at the International Commission of Jurists biennial conference in Berlin, adopted a Declaration on Upholding Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Combating Terrorism.

"Since September 2001 many states have adopted new counter-terrorism measures that are in breach of their international obligations. In some countries, the post-September 2001 climate of insecurity has been exploited to justify long-standing human rights violations carried out in the name of national security."

The subject of terrorism came up in several resolutions and decisions adopted at the 61st. session of the Commission on Human Rights, which concluded on April 22, 2005. During this year's session a group of human rights organizations issued a joint press release calling on the Commission to act to address meaningfully one of the greatest human rights challenges presently faced by the international community: the need to protect human rights in combating terrorism.

The Berlin Declaration highlights the grave challenge to the rule of law brought about by excessive counter-terrorism measures, reaffirms the most fundamental human rights violated by those measures, and delineates methods of action to address the challenge.

The Commission on Human Rights concluded its annual session for 2005 on April 22nd. 2005, after having debated a wide range of human rights issues under its agenda items from crosscutting thematic issues, to country situations, to the organization of its work.

During the six-week session, which began on 14 March 2005, the Commission adopted 86 resolutions, 16 decisions and four statements by its Chairperson, Makarim Wibisono of Indonesia.

The subject of terrorism came up in several resolutions and decisions adopted at this year's session. These references correlated to national counter-terrorism measures in relation to the work and safety of human rights defenders; the use of counter-terrorism measures to restrict the right to freedom of opinion and expression; and equating religion with terrorism and its adverse consequences on the enjoyment of the right to freedom or religion or belief of all members of the religious communities. The Commission decided to appoint, for a period of three years, a Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism...

Within the context of its agenda item on the promotion and protection of human rights, the Commission adopted a set of Basic Principles and Guidelines on the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations of international humanitarian law.

Within the framework of so-called special procedures, the 53-member Commission also decided, among other things, to establish a post for an Independent Expert on minorities for a period of two years to ensure that Governments were guaranteeing the rights of persons belonging to national or ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities, and to request the United Nations Secretary-General to appoint a Special Representative on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises, for an initial period of two years, to identify and clarify standards of corporate responsibility and accountability with regard to human rights...

To homage them all, we also play in this program the song "Die Moorsoldaten", known in French as "Le Chant des Marais" and in English as the "Peat Bog Soldiers". This song was written in 1934-1936 by Rudi Goguel and Herbert Kirmse at the Borgermoor concentration camp. It then spread from camp to camp, clandestinely, and became the hymn for deportees and political prisoners, to be exterminated in most of the cases. It is approximately 4 minutes long.

On January 14, 2004, at approximately 11:55 a.m. in Madrid’s Audiencia Nacional, the trial started in the case of former navy captain Adolfo Scilingo. Scilingo was a member of the Argentinian navy and a voluntary participant in the operations of the extermination group known as Task Force 3.3.2.

... Approximately 20 minutes into the proceedings (after the formal opening of the session and the preliminary matters) the bench began to read Scilingo his rights. Scilingo was asked if he knew that he was in a court of justice. Because the judge was concerned that Scilingo was not fit to stand trial, given that he was slumped in his chair with his eyes closed, the president of the court stopped the session to have Scilingo examined by doctors for the second time that morning.

The forensic doctors are prepared for such incidents. Trial resumed with their report. The doctors said that Scilingo had a negative attitude, but that he was lucid, and capable of understanding the proceedings against him. They said that if Scilingo wanted to, he was capable of answering the court’s questions. Thus, the trial went forward.

Adolfo Scilingo chose to remain silent, which is equal to refuse to answer to the court's questions...

On July 30th., 2004, Radio Nizkor made available an audio report on the establishment of a Tribunal to prosecute former Khmer Rouge leaders. Said report set out the arrangements for the establishment of the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, its structure and the main legal flaws surrounding it.

Now we present the main developments having taken place since then.

The United Nations and Cambodia agreed, on December 10th., 2004, on a $56 million budget for a special court to try aging leaders of the Khmer Rouge regime responsible for killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in the country during the 1970s.

The talks between a six-member UN team and the Government wrapped up in the capital, Phnom Penh, with agreement also on the premises and infrastructure for the two Extraordinary Chambers. One court will conduct trials and the other will hear appeals within the existing Cambodia justice system...

On October 4, 2004, the Cambodian National Assembly adopted the UN tribunal agreement, and the next day, adopted 23 amendments to the 2001 tribunal law; those amendments had been recommended by the UN... On October 27, 2004, Cambodia formally promulgated the UN tribunal agreement...

On December 7, 2004 President Bush signed into effect the so-called Nethercutt Amendment, which suspends Economic Support Fund assistance to States Parties to the International Criminal Court or ICC who have not signed bilateral immunity agreements with the US.

What the Nethercutt Amendment does is exempt all U.S. nationals and contractors with the US from accountability for widespread and systematic war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed on the territory of a signatory country.

On December 9th., 2004 the Dutch European Union Presidency made public its Declaration on the Nethercutt amendment, regretting its adoption...

The US has deployed its anti-ICC efforts during previous congressional sessions. The House and the Senate had approved on July 2002 another piece of legislation prohibiting US cooperation with the International Criminal Court: the American Servicemembers' Protection Act or ASPA...

The Bush Administration has also been conducting a vigorous campaign of trying to conclude bilateral international agreements that will remove US nationals from the reach of the Court. These are the so-called "Article 98 bilateral agreements"...

Also recently, the US has deployed its anti-ICC efforts before the UN General Assembly, where the US attempted to have the ICC taken off the UN General Assembly agenda. However, on November 19th, 2004, the GA Sixth Committee (Legal) unanimously passed its resolution (and corrigendum) on the ICC without a vote... When the GA Plenary adopted the resolution on December 2, 2004, the US delegation dissociated itself from consensus on the resolution.

On December 1st, 2004, the Center for Constitutional Rights asked two federal court judges to forcefully reject the Bush Administration's effort to dismiss 12 Habeas Corpus petitions brought on behalf of individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay.

In an extraordinary move, the government has essentially sought to overturn the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case Rasul v. Bush.

On November 5th, 2004, a group of attorneys representing several Guantanamo detainees submitted a Memorandum in opposition to the government's motion to dismiss the instant habeas petitions.

The Petitioners assert in their Memorandum the following:

• that the President's exercise of his war powers is subject to judicial review
• that the Supreme Court has already determined that the Guantanamo detainees have stated a claim
• that pertinent case law, moreover, confirms that the detainees have due process rights under the Constitution that they may vindicate through habeas actions.
• that the detainees also have rights under the Geneva Conventions and other international law that may be vindicated in a habeas action and,
• that the detainees have common law rights that inhere in the habeas statute and do not depend upon the cognizability of rights otherwise provided by the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.