BNN | Business News Network

Debates on same-sex marriage have heated up since Massachusetts first approved marriage between gays and lesbians five years ago. Connecticut came in second. This year, Iowa and Vermont followed suit while Maine became the most recent proponent state of gay marriage.

In a surprising move, New Hampshire lawmakers struck down a bill that would have made the state the sixth in the US to legalize same-sex marriage. The rejected legislation was a watered-down version of an earlier bill approved by the state Senate and House of Representatives last March 26.

Despite the state’s Senate approving the legislation 14-10, the amended version of the bill was rejected by a slim margin of 188-186 vote in the state’s Democrat-dominated House of Representatives. The passage of the first version of the bill was impeded when Governor John Lynch recommended changes in the language of the bill.

Lynch, a three-term Democrat, supplied rewordings of the earlier bill so that it should possess a strong and clear indication of protecting any religious association or institution, or individual working for these associations. Lynch wanted to guarantee that clerical and religious institutions will not face fines or lawsuits should they decline to solemnize gay marriages.

Other House Republicans defended their negative vote, saying that the state’s constituents have not been given ample opportunity to discuss and voice out their opinions on the issue.

Some legislators thought that the amended version with the religious liberties clause would have allowed legalizing discrimination altogether. Steve Vaillancourt, a gay Republican representative, opposed the amended bill, warning that the House should not be “bullied” by the governor.

The bill has been referred by both chambers to a committee for further review and consideration.

American adults still retain a conservative view on same-sex marriage, according to a CNN poll in April. Fifty-four percent of those questioned in the poll felt strongly against gay marriage while 44% of them approve of it. Younger people, however, are more open to gay marriage than adults are.

The world’s foremost human rights defender is confronting human rights violators within its own ranks. The United Nations has to deal with an internal problem concerning a number of sexual harassment complaints. A number of accusers and accused have alleged mishandling of their cases.

Many of them complained that the existing justice system within the U.N. is “arbitrary, unfair and mired in bureaucracy”. Resolution of cases drag and accusers do not have access to investigative reports. Several women who filed harassment raps claim their contracts were not renewed and before they could see justice done, the men they accused had either retired or resigned, severing the U.N. justice system’s jurisdiction over them.

Unlike many large global organizations, the U.N. has a different way of handling complaints. Many UN officials enjoy diplomatic immunity from criminal or civil suits. The filing of cases against them is possible only when the U.N. lifts immunity. If this does not happen, complainants can only rely on advancing their case through the internal justice system.

The current internal justice system is anything but perfect. It involves several investigative channels and multi-layered appellate processes. While the U.N. Administrative Tribunal is the final authority, the secretary-general is vested the power to rule on appeals.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon admits that the internal justice system is “troubled”. He expressed his concern over the string of cases involving sexual harassment and sex discrimination and called this a “scourge” that remains a high priority for him.

In response to this crisis, the U.N. has scheduled an overhaul of its internal justice system to take effect on July 1. The new system aims to replace the slow and complex bureaucratic system with a faster and more professional process. U.N. employees may file complaints with their respective departments, which will then conduct an investigation. Two boards will hear appeals and transmit nonbinding recommendations to the secretary-general who will no longer have authority to rule on appeals. The UN Administrative Tribunal remains the final arbiter.

Terror suspect Ahmed Ghailani will be transferred to New York to face trial at an unspecified date, making him the first Guantanamo inmate to be tried on US soil in a civilian court.

The Tanzanian is charged with war crimes for his participation in the 1998 US Embassy bombings in East Africa that left 11 people dead and dozens injured. He was captured in Pakistan in July 2004 and delivered to US custody in early 2005. In September 2006, he was one of the 14 detainees who were shipped to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba from their incarceration in so-called “secret CIA prisons”.

Ghailani faces prosecution for murder, attacking civilians, conspiracy and providing material support for terrorism. Transcript from a 2007 closed-door hearing indicates he admitted to delivering the explosives used for the bombings but professed innocence in knowing the plot beforehand. If convicted, the Pentagon is going after the death penalty for the terror suspect.

This development comes as the US Senate voted 90-6 to reject President Obama’s $80M fund request for the closure of the Guantanamo camp, demanding a closure plan prior to any approval. Obama addressed this issue in a speech last Thursday, May 22, 2009.

Obama’s moves on the Guantanamo transfer issue have irked both his political allies and enemies. Republicans want the detention camp retained, viewing the transfer of Guantanamo inmates to US soil as a security risk to Americans. On the other hand, human rights groups ACLU and Amnesty International criticized his “confusing” position on the use of military commissions in trying the detainees. As one of his first official acts as President, Obama had promised a halt to this system in order to usher a new era for respecting human rights, but later announced its continued use with several modifications.

The Guantanamo camp was established shortly after 9/11 and caused international outrage for glaring human rights violations, including the use of waterboarding, which the Bush administration consented.