Mexico is weighing the use of masked judges to preside over organized crime trials, a measure aimed at shielding members of the judiciary from potential retribution by drug cartels. This proposal, added this week to a contentious package of judicial reforms, comes in response to a surge in murders of police chiefs, prosecutors, and judges as cartel power has expanded since 2018.

Mexico's courts could use masked judges for cartel trialshttps://t.co/Qvt3nlSmVH

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) August 28, 2024

According to The Telegraph, the amendment to the planned overhaul of the court system calls for "judges without faces," leaving the implementation details to senior judges. This consideration follows several high-profile attacks on judicial figures, including the murder of Judge Roberto Elías Martínez in the central state of Zacatecas in December 2022. Prosecutors allege that Martínez's assassination was ordered from within a prison where two defendants in cases he was overseeing were being held. In Zacatecas, 103 judges have reportedly received threats.

The proposal draws parallels to measures employed in Peru during the 1990s to try alleged members of the Shining Path terrorist group. However, the Peruvian system, which involved masked judges or those seated behind screens, proved highly controversial and led to numerous miscarriages of justice.

The United Nations has cautioned that the use of anonymous judges could potentially violate suspects' rights to due process. Despite these concerns, the judicial reform package, which also includes provisions for the election of judges, appears to have sufficient support in the Mexican Congress to pass.

Critics have labeled the reforms as populist and authoritarian, arguing they could undermine judicial independence and allow political control over the courts. The proposed changes have sparked economic concerns, with the Mexican peso's value declining as investors worry about the rule of law in the country.

US Ambassador Ken Salazar has taken the unusual step of publicly criticizing the reforms, describing them as a "threat to democracy." This statement prompted a sharp response from outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who announced on Tuesday that he was putting relations with the United States and Canada "on pause" after both countries questioned the legal reforms.

The post Mexico proposes masked judges for cartel trials to avoid retaliation appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

An Israeli court has made an unprecedented ruling, allowing the marriage of two minors due to exceptional circumstances surrounding the girl's pregnancy and the couple's religious background.

In a rare judicial decision, an Israeli court has approved the marriage of two 17-year-olds despite their ages falling below the country's legal marriage threshold. Judge Itay Karmi, presiding over the case, characterized his ruling as "The best possible decision under the current circumstances" after carefully weighing the complex factors at play.

The couple, who adhere to a religious lifestyle, petitioned the court for permission to marry after the girl became pregnant. Their legal counsel argued that marriage would benefit both young individuals, shielding them from social embarrassment. The attorney emphasized the couple's maturity to make this decision and highlighted the support of their families.

However, the Attorney General opposed the request, basing the objection on an assessment by an appointed social worker. The social worker's report concluded that underage marriages generally do not serve minors' best interests and should only be sanctioned in the most exceptional cases.

Despite this opposition, Karmi granted the couple's request, citing the pregnancy as a crucial factor in his decision. "Given the present situation, the most appropriate course of action is to approve the boy and girl's petition," he stated. He underscored the case's complexity, distinguishing between a "good" decision and a "right" one. He noted that child marriages are typically viewed as an outdated practice that often prioritizes family interests over the minor's wellbeing. Consequently, the judge emphasized that courts must exercise heightened scrutiny when evaluating such requests.

The judge stressed the importance of assessing each case individually, with a focus on the minors' best interests. He stated that marriage should only be approved in exceptional circumstances when it's clear the decision stems from free will without familial pressure and when allowing the marriage would better serve the minor's interests than prohibiting it. Karmi determined that this particular case met these stringent criteria.

In his thorough examination of the case, Karmi considered several key factors: the couple's maturity levels, the quality of their relationship, their family dynamics, and their socio-economic background. He also weighed the potential ramifications of denying the request, including the social and personal challenges associated with an out-of-wedlock pregnancy.

Karmi reasoned, "The concerning effects on the minors' wellbeing are inevitable due to the pregnancy itself. Therefore, permitting the marriage, considering the couple's personal, familial, and social context, will actually mitigate these effects." He posited that marriage would fortify the couple's bond and sense of security, alleviate social discomfort, and aid in their preparation for parenthood. Furthermore, he believed that granting permission would foster a sense of responsibility in both the couple and their families, ultimately serving the best interests of all involved.

The post Court permits underage marriage due to pregnancy in unprecedented ruling appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

For many diners around the world, the rich tomato-based butter chicken curry is a beloved staple of Indian cuisine. Yet the origins of this iconic dish are fiercely disputed by two families in Delhi, who have taken their rivalry to court in a high-stakes battle over culinary bragging rights.

In the tumultuous aftermath of partition in 1947, when the British colony of India was divided into the new nations of India and Pakistan, two men named Kundan fled the city of Peshawar to the Indian capital. There, they co-founded Moti Mahal, a restaurant that achieved legendary status for a heavenly dish combining tandoori chicken in a buttery tomato gravy.

Moti Mahal drew elite patrons like US President Richard Nixon and former First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy until its closure in 1992. However, the partnership dissolved, and each man's descendants now lay claim to creating the original butter chicken recipe. 

The feud has escalated into a trademark lawsuit filed in the Delhi High Court. The upscale Daryaganj restaurant chain, established in 2019 by descendants of Kundan Lal Jaggi, is accused by the family behind a 1976 offshoot also called Moti Mahal of "misleading the public" over butter chicken's provenance.

"We told our team to imagine you're in 1947 and you don't have any of the blenders, the equipment, or anything to help you out," said Amit Bagga, Daryaganj's CEO as reported on NBC news, describing how the restaurant chops tomatoes by hand to recreate Jaggi's unique texture. According to Bagga, Jaggi improvised the buttery sauce to stretch a dwindling chicken supply one busy day.

The Gujral family, however, asserts that Kundan Lal Gujral invented butter chicken back in Peshawar before the move to Delhi by adding a buttery "makhani" sauce to leftover chicken to prevent it from drying out. Moti Mahal representatives declined to comment.

As the case awaits its next hearing in September, the legal battle has gripped the national conversation. "It's good publicity for us," Bagga admitted, as inquisitive customers flock to Daryaganj to judge the contested dish for themselves.

The saga offers a window into Delhi's rich culinary heritage shaped by the 1947 exodus of skilled Hindu tandoor masters fleeing religious violence in modern-day Pakistan. "It was these entrepreneurs who transformed the scene in the blink of an eye," said historian Rana Safvi.

While the dueling origin stories remain unresolved, butter chicken's creamy allure has endured across cultures. "It became very easy for anyone to eat, even for those who are not used to spicy food," Safvi explained of the curry's global popularity.

For first-time Daryaganj diner Satyam Kumar, 24, the identity of the true inventor is immaterial. As he savored the restaurant's rendition, he reflected, "But who invented it doesn't matter." In Delhi's raging butter chicken wars, the real winner is a dish beloved by many.

The post The plot chickens: Who invented the staple buttery Indian dish? appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Israel is considering establishing an artificial intelligence-based system that would improve the efficiency of courts, Israel Hayom has learned. 

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

The head of the Israeli court system, Judge Michael Spitzer, discussed the innovative idea meant to expedite legal processes with an American professor specializing in AI last month. 

According to Spitzer, the idea is in its infancy and will "in no way be a replacement for judicial discretion." 

Spitzer's predecessor, retired Judge Yigal Marzel, warned against incorporating AI in the judicial system back in 2022, saying there needed to be "people, not machines" in courts. 

Tehilla Shwartz Altshuler, a senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, said in a recent piece that China has already incorporated so-called "smart courts" that use AI to provide judicial services to a large population. If a human judge wishes to rule differently, he or she needs to justify the decision in writing. 

In recent years, Estonia also announced plans to use AI for small claims courts, with the possibility to appeal the decision to a human judge. 

Israel Hayom has asked ChatGPT whether incorporating AI in courts was a good idea, to which it replied that while artificial intelligence could "provide information and technological support in legal systems, it could not replace actual judges." 

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Israel weighs incorporating AI into courts appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Donald Trump became the first former American president to face a judge on federal charges as he pleaded not guilty in a Miami courtroom Tuesday to dozens of felony counts accusing him of hoarding classified documents and refusing government demands to give them back.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram

The history-making court date, centered on charges that Trump mishandled government secrets that as commander-in-chief he was entrusted to protect, kickstarts a legal process that will unfold at the height of the 2024 presidential campaign and carry profound consequences not only for his political future but also for his own personal liberty.

Video: Reuters

Trump approached his arraignment with characteristic bravado, posting social media broadsides against the prosecution from inside his motorcade en route to the courthouse and insisting – as he has through years of legal woes – that he has done nothing wrong and was being persecuted for political purposes. But inside the courtroom, he sat silently, scowling and arms crossed, as a lawyer entered a not guilty plea on his behalf in a brief arraignment that ended without him having to surrender his passport or otherwise restrict his travel.

The arraignment, though largely procedural in nature, was the latest in an unprecedented reckoning this year for Trump, who faces charges in New York arising from hush money payments during his 2016 presidential campaign as well as ongoing investigations in Washington and Atlanta into efforts to undo the results of the 2020 race.

Always in campaign mode, he swiftly pivoted from the solemn courtroom to a festive restaurant, stopping on his way out of Miami at Versailles, an iconic Cuban spot in the city's Little Havana neighborhood where supporters serenaded Trump, who turns 77 on Wednesday, with "Happy Birthday." The back-to-back events highlight the tension for Trump in the months ahead as he balances the pageantry of campaigning with courtroom stops accompanying his status as a twice-indicted criminal defendant.

Yet the gravity of the moment was unmistakable.

Until last week, no former president had ever been charged by the Justice Department, let alone accused of mishandling top-secret information. The indictment unsealed last week charged Trump with 37 felony counts – many under the Espionage Act – that accuse him of illegally storing classified documents in his bedroom, bathroom, shower and other locations at Mar-a-Lago and trying to hide them from the Justice Department as investigators demanded them back. The charges carry a yearslong prison sentence in the event of a conviction.

Trump has relied on a familiar playbook of painting himself as a victim of political persecution. He attacked the Justice Department special counsel who filed the case as a "thug" and "deranged," pledged to remain in the race no matter what and addressed supporters Tuesday night at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club, where he delivered a roughly half-hour speech full of repeated falsehoods and incendiary rhetoric and threatened to go after President Joe Biden and his family if elected.

"The seal is broken by what they've done. They should never have done this," Trump said of the indictment.

But Attorney General Merrick Garland, an appointee of Biden, sought to insulate the department from political attacks by handing ownership of the case last November to a special counsel, Jack Smith, who on Friday declared, "We have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone."

Smith attended Tuesday's arraignment, sitting in the front row behind his team of prosecutors.

The court appearance unfolded against angst over potential protests, with some high-profile backers using barbed rhetoric to voice support. Though city officials said they prepared for possible unrest, there were few signs of significant disruption.

Trump didn't say a word during the court appearance, other than to occasionally turn and whisper to his attorneys who were seated on either side of him. He fiddled with a pen and clasped his hands on the table in front of him as the lawyers and the judge debated the conditions of his release.

While he was not required to surrender a passport – prosecutors said he was not considered a flight risk – the magistrate judge presiding over the arraignment directed Trump to not discuss the case with certain witnesses. That includes Walt Nauta, his valet who was indicted last week on charges that he moved boxes of documents at Trump's direction and misled the FBI about it.

Nauta did not enter a plea Tuesday because he did not have a local lawyer with him.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche objected to the idea of imposing restrictions on the former president's contact with possible witnesses, noting they include many people close to Trump, including staff and members of his protection detail.

"Many of the people he interacts with on a daily basis – including the men and women who protect him – are potential witnesses in this case," Blanche said.

Trump, who has repeatedly insisted that he did nothing wrong, showed no emotion as he was led by law enforcement out of the courtroom through a side door.

Even for a man whose presidency and post-White House life have been defined by criminal investigations, the documents probe had long stood out both because of the volume of evidence that prosecutors had seemed to amass and the severity of the allegations.

A federal grand jury in Washington had heard testimony for months, but the Justice Department filed the case in Florida, where Trump's Mar-a-Lago resort is located and where many of the alleged acts of obstruction occurred.

Though Trump appeared Tuesday before a federal magistrate, the case has been assigned to a District Court judge he appointed, Aileen Cannon, who ruled in his favor last year in a dispute over whether an outside special master could be appointed to review the seized classified documents. A federal appeals panel ultimately overturned her ruling.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

It's unclear what defenses Trump is likely to invoke as the case moves forward. Two of his lead lawyers announced their resignation the morning after his indictment, and the notes and recollections of another attorney, M. Evan Corcoran, are cited repeatedly throughout the 49-page charging document, suggesting prosecutors envision him as a potential key witness.

The indictment Friday accuses Trump of illegally retaining national security documents that he took with him from the White House to Mar-a-Lago after leaving office in January 2021. The documents he stored, prosecutors say, included material on nuclear programs, defense and weapons capabilities of the U.S. and foreign governments and a Pentagon "attack plan," prosecutors say. He is accused of showing off some to people who didn't have security clearances to view them.

Beyond that, according to the indictment, he repeatedly sought to obstruct government efforts to recover the documents, including by directing Nauta to move boxes and also suggesting to his own lawyer that he hide or destroy documents sought by a Justice Department subpoena.

The post Trump pleads not guilty to federal charges that he illegally kept classified documents appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Legal reforms in Abu Dhabi designed to enhance the emirate's appeal to foreigners will allow for non-Muslim judges, birth certificates for children of unmarried parents, equality of men and women as witnesses, and new alimony and inheritance laws.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The new secular law, a copy of which was seen by Reuters, intends to make the political capital of the United Arab Emirates more attractive for outsiders to live and work.

It has been welcomed as a step forward for gender equality.

"It gives a lot of rights to women which did not exist before," said Hassan Elhais, a legal consultant from UAE-based Al Rowaad Advocates. "It is revolutionary."

The UAE's tourism and business hub Dubai – usually more avant garde than Abu Dhabi – could  follow suit and craft its own family laws too. That would help the UAE keep a competitive edge in luring investment as conservative Gulf neighbor Saudi Arabia opens itself up to bring in foreign money and talent.

Foreigners, mostly from South Asia, Egypt and the Philippines, account for about 88% of the UAE's nearly 10 million population, fueling all aspects of the economy from executive positions to low-paid construction and domestic workers.

The Family Law for Non-Muslim Expatriates in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi, announced on Sunday and expected to come into force in December, allows for "personal status" procedures – such  as divorce, inheritance and marriage – to take place for the first time in the country outside of religious codes.

It also allows non-Muslim judges to preside over family issues for the first time anywhere in the Gulf.

It introduces the concepts of civil marriage, no-fault divorce and joint child custody. And, also for the first time in the UAE, it allows babies born to unmarried foreign parents to obtain birth certificates if the father recognizes paternity.

The new law could also give more credibility to Abu Dhabi court judgements when parties apply for them to be recognized in, for example, Europe, Elhais said.

While next door Saudi Arabia has introduced social reforms to reduce gender segregation, lift a ban on women driving and dismantle many aspects of a male guardianship system, personal status laws are still governed by sharia.

That is the case in other Gulf states and the wider Middle East, with some exceptions. Christian and Jewish codes similarly apply on family matters in countries such as Israel and Lebanon.

Many aspects of sharia family law give more standing and rights to men, such as where two female witnesses are considered the equal of one male witness in family court procedures. Abu Dhabi's new law says female witnesses are equal to male.

Rothna Begum, of Human Rights Watch, said the law is an important step towards providing equality, but wider legal reform was required to include all citizens and residents in the UAE, which is made up of seven emirates.

"The UAE should instead pass an optional civil code as well as reform its Personal Status Law to ensure equality between men and women in all matters relating to marriage, divorce, inheritance and decisions concerning children," said Begum.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

In one potentially problematic area, expatriate couples in Abu Dhabi, which has a population of about 2.9 million, need to opt into the secular system. That opens the possibility for a husband, for example, to insist on entering the sharia system instead.

Abu Dhabi's reform comes a year after the UAE at a federal level started to reform its legal system to make it more attractive for investment. Changes included decriminalizing premarital sexual relations and alcohol consumption, and cancelling provisions for leniency when dealing with so-called "honor killings."

The Gulf state also introduced longer-term visas as a way to attract and retain talent and encourage more businesses to set up shop.

The post Abu Dhabi's new family law hailed as step toward gender equality appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

One of Israel's most wanted divorce refusers was arrested by the police last week, Israel Hayom learned from sources involved in the matter. 

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

Seven years ago, Ronen Vital fled a rabbinical court hearing and has refused to grant his wife, Orly, a divorcee ever since. He was apprehended in south Tel Aviv thanks to extensive efforts and hundreds of hours of surveillance and investigation by the Yad La'isha organization, which advocates on behalf of women whose husbands refuse to grant them divorce papers. 

The person who located Vital was a private investigator hired by the organization, who spotted him sitting in a parked car in southern Tel Aviv. He immediately informed Yad La'isha CEO Pnina Omer, who, in turn, alerted law enforcement, which resulted in Vital's arrest 15 minutes later, although he initially refused to identify himself. The next day he remained in custody at the Rabbinical Court of Jerusalem. 

Vital's wife has been an "agunah" – literally "anchored" – a term used to describe the legal situation of a woman whose husband refuses to grant her a Jewish writ of divorce, for seven years, unable to remarry. The two have four children together. 

Vital responded emotionally to the development saying, "It's incredible to think that he's literally been living under our noses for all these years, less than an hour from our home. I only hope that he'll come to his senses and bring this painful chapter to an end, for the good of everyone including himself."

Thanking Chief Rabbi David Lau and his office for their support, and to the Israel Police officers who have worked to make this arrest, Yad La'isha's rabbinical court advocate and civil attorney Tehila Cohen said this case should be a signal, "that every get abuser should know that we won't rest or stay silent until every woman forced to live in these chained marriages is set free. We will continue to do everything in our legal power to make that possible."

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post Notorious divorce refuser arrested after 7 years on the run appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

German court Wednesday sentenced a former member of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's security services to four and a half years in prison for facilitating the torture of civilians, the first such verdict for crimes against humanity in the 10-year-long Syrian civil war.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

The higher regional court in the western city of Koblenz said that before moving to Germany, Eyad A. had arrested at least 30 anti-government protesters in Syria at the start of the conflict in 2011 and sent them to an intelligence facility where he knew detainees were tortured.

The verdict gives hope to the 800,000 Syrian refugees in Germany who say they were tortured in government facilities after attempts to establish an international tribunal for Syria failed.

"This is an important step forward in the process of securing accountability for the Syrian government's systematic use of torture against civilians," Steve Kostas, a lawyer with the Open Society Foundation's Justice Initiative, which is representing the Syrian plaintiff, said.

The Assad government denied all such allegations.

Eyad A.'s lawyers asked for an acquittal, saying he had carried out the arrests in and around Damascus under duress by his superiors. He requested from the court to consider him a witness in broader legal efforts against the Syrian government.

The same court will continue hearings in the case of a second suspect identified as Anwar R., a former intelligence officer charged with 58 murders in a Damascus prison where prosecutors say at least 4,000 opposition activists were tortured between 2011 and 2012.

Syrian human rights lawyer Anwar al-Bunni said the unprecedented verdict would speed up efforts to bring charges against former members of the Syrian government suspected of war crimes who fled to Europe.

"History has been made," al-Bunni said. "The first verdict against a member of the Syrian regime's torture and murder machine is a verdict against the whole regime, not just against one individual. It gives hope that justice is possible."

 Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

The post German court issues landmark verdict in Syria torture case appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

 Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter  

According to the Israeli business website CTECH, the lawsuit accuses the above companies of intentionally misleading regulators about "a fraudulent software meant to falsify diesel engine emissions readings" to persuade Israel that the cars met the country's environmental standards.

The state prosecution asserted that the vehicles would not have been allowed into the country if the real data had been provided.

The scandal surrounding the software was revealed in 2015.

Investigations and legal action have been taken in a number of countries, including the United States, Germany, Spain, and Australia.

Champion Motors says that Israel imported 12,000 such cars between 2008 and 2016, but has denied commenting on the lawsuit.

Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!

Reprinted with permission from JNS.org.

The post Israel sues Volkswagen for $152M over 'fraudulent software' appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

Victoria state Supreme Court Justice Elizabeth Hollingworth ordered Codey Herrmann, 21, to serve a minimum of 30 years behind bars for the brutal killing and sexual assault of 21-year-old Aya Maasarwe in January.

Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook and Twitter

"Women should be free to walk the streets alone without fear of being violently attacked by a stranger," Hollingworth said. "She had no opportunity to flee or escape."

The victim had been studying at La Trobe University in Melbourne for the previous five months as an exchange student. She was on her way from a comedy club to her student accommodation on campus when she was attacked.

Video: Reuters

Maasarwe's relatives sobbed in the public gallery as the judge recounted details of the killing.

"It was a savage attack with a crude but effective weapon which immediately rendered her unconscious," the judge said, noting Maasarwe had been alone, small in stature and unsuspecting.

He then set her body on fire to destroy evidence, which "showed utter contempt of her dignity," the judge said.

Prosecutors had applied for the killer to be imprisoned for life. But Herrmann's lawyer Tim Marsh told the court his client deserved some leniency because he had a personality disorder stemming from a severely traumatic childhood and this had warped his view of the world.

Maasarwe's father Saeed reacted to the sentencing, asking his daughter be remembered as someone who loved everybody, regardless of their background.

The post Australian court sentences man who raped, killed Israeli student to 36 years in prison appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.