Strongly Protested by the Rwandan Government

Rwanda minister of information Louise Mushikiwabo, at a press conference, said the Rwandan government had through a diplomatic protest note served onto the Germany embassy in Kigali, objected to the arrest of Ms Kabuye, accusing the German government of bias, having failed to extradite two Hutu extremist elements, to face trial before the Rwanda genocide tribunal.

Judge Bruguière in November 2006 stirred controversy with his call for the prosecution of President Paul Kagame for actions alleged to have triggered the 1994 genocide.
Judge Bruguière said, Mr Kagame, whose Tutsi-dominated Rwandan Patriotic Front took control of the country after the 100-day genocide that saw the slaughter of 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus, should stand trial at the United Nations’ International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, ICTR.
Bruguière wants Kagame charged with bringing down the plane of former Rwandan president Juvénal Habyarimana with ground-to-air missiles on April 6, 1994. Three French crew member died with Habyarimana aboard his Falcon jet, together with the then president of neighboring Burundi, Cyprien Ntaryamire.

Judge Bruguière was unable to indict Mr Kagame because under French law sitting heads of state enjoy immunity from prosecution but the French judge also issued arrest warrants for nine of Kagama’s top aides, including Ms Kabuye.
The others are James Kabarebe, the head of the military, Charles Kayonga, army chief of staff; Faustin Jyamwasa-Kayumba, ambassador to India; Jackson Nkurunziza, of presidential guard; Samuel Kanjyamera, an RPF parliamentary deputy; Jacob Tumwime, an army officer; Franck Nziza, a Presidential Guard officer and Eric Hakizimana, an intelligence officer.

Supporters of the new measures say the expanded database will help prevent crime, but civil rights groups have expressed privacy concerns. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz. sponsored the 2005 law that gave the Justice Department this authority.

It is being erroneously reported that thirteen states have implemented similar laws and that these laws have been upheld in court. Thirteen states have implemented laws, and in November 2007, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit did rule that all convicted federal felons must provide DNA samples to a federal database available to police departments throughout the country. In 2005, the Third Circuit ruled that a convicted bank robber had to submit DNA samples to CODIS. Also a New Jersey state appeals court upheld a comparable state law in 2005. Notice the term “convicted”

Justice Department

About 1.2 million additional people could be added to the FBI’s Combined DNA Indexing System (CODIS) every year under the expansion. Erik Ablin, Justice Department spokesman, said the DNA collection would be subject to the same privacy laws applied to current DNA sampling. That means none of it would be used for identifying genetic traits, diseases or disorders. People who are not convicted can request the destruction of their DNA samples.

American Civil Liberties Union

The new regulation would mean that the federal government could store DNA samples of people who are not guilty of any crime, said Jesselyn McCurdy, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union.
“Now innocent people’s DNA will be put into this huge CODIS database, and it will be very difficult for them to get it out if they are not charged or convicted of a crime,” McCurdy said.

Thirteen States

The thirteen states which have enacted DNA laws are Alaska, Arizona, California, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia.

Homeland Security?

The Homeland Security Department — the federal agency charged with policing immigration — supports the new rule. “DNA is a proven law-enforcement tool,” DHS spokesman Russ Knocke said.
The rule would not allow for DNA samples to be collected from immigrants who are legally in the United States or those being processed for admission, unless the person was arrested.

Micheal Chertoff needs to stay home
Homeland Security Secretary is headed by Michael Chertoff, who was recently in Canada discussing the Bush administration’s push to create stricter identity systems including the so-called “Server in the Sky” program to share fingerprint databases among the U.S., Canada, the U.K., and Australia.
When asked about concerns some critics are raising over the privacy aspects of sharing of that kind of data, very personal data, among four countries is quite a scary thing. Secretary Chertoff replied, “Well, first of all, a fingerprint is hardly personal data because you leave it on glasses and silverware and articles all over the world, they’re like footprints. They’re not particularly private.”
Chertoff’s comments have drawn sharp criticism from Jennifer Stoddart, the Canadian official in charge of privacy issues. “Fingerprints constitute extremely personal information for which there is clearly a high expectation of privacy”.

Home of the FREE

There have been numerous questions raised about how this Administration is treating our personal information. Secretary Chertoff’s comments show a new reason to worry — they don’t think it’s “personal” at all. I wonder if they see DNA the same.

DO SOMETHING OR DO NOTHING
The law will soon be published in the Federal Register and will then be subject to a 30-day comment period.

On the Net:
State Laws on DNA Data Banks:

http://www.ncsl.org/programs/cj/dnadatabanks.htm

http://www.dnaresource.com/documents/2008DNAExpansionLegislation.pdf

Clashes erupted in downtown Minsk, as squads of black-clad riot police sought to block opposition demonstrators who were marching toward a detention center, where protesters arrested Friday were being held.

Earlier, police holding large shields formed lines to force back crowds trying to reach the square where an opposition tent camp had been set up before police removed it early Friday morning, arresting hundreds.

Eventually, the protesters made their way to a city park, where they chanted anti-government slogans to denounce hard-line President Alexander Lukashenko. Police made no move against them there, and the mood was largely confident, in spite of government warnings that the rally was illegal.

Top opposition leader Alexander Milinkevich told the crowd that Belarus would soon be free from Lukashenko’s rule. Lukashenko has been in power since 1994.

The long-time president was declared the winner of Sunday’s election, with 83 percent of the vote. Mr. Milinkevich was credited with six percent. Protesters say the results are false, and are demanding a new election, although there is little chance the authorities will agree to that demand.

However, Milinkevich told the protesters their rallies and the tent camp protest prove that Belarusians are no longer afraid to voice their opinions. He said, “If you had asked me a month ago if something like this would happen, I would have said, ‘only someone crazy would think we could stay on the square for more than three days.’”

After the rally dispersed, some protesters followed a call by another top opposition leader, Alexander Kozulin, to march to the detention center, where protesters detained Friday are being held. Police detained Kozulin and an aide to Milinkevich.

On Friday, the United States and European Union announced that they will impose new sanctions against the Lukashenko government, because of apparent fraud in Sunday’s election and the crackdown against the opposition.

Russia accuses Western powers of meddling in the internal affairs of Belarus, and has congratulated Mr. Lukashenko on his re-election.