Author: TSA Press

* Prosecutors assigned to the Roger Stone criminal case have resigned amid concerns that the White House “stonewalled” DOJ officials about sentencing recommendations. [The Hill]

* Jussie Smollett is facing new charges over his claims of being assaulted on the streets of Chicago, and his lawyers are crying foul. [Deadline]

* Alan Dershowitz filed claims against David Boies for defamation and other causes of action. [Wall Street Journal]

* Netflix has lost its bid to dismiss a lawsuit about using the “Choose Your Own Adventure”® phrase when promoting a popular movie. See, made sure to use the trademark sign there… [Hollywood Report]

* President Trump has won the dismissal of a lawsuit aimed at forcing the White House to archive communications with Vladimir Putin and other officials. [Washington Post]

* A New York attorney tried to escape a grand larceny investigation by buying a boat in cash and sailing to the Caribbean. She made it as far as New Jersey. [New York Law Journal]

---

Jordan Rothman is a partner of The Rothman Law Firm, a full-service New York and New Jersey law firm. He is also the founder of Student Debt Diaries, a website discussing how he paid off his student loans. You can reach Jordan through email at jordan@rothmanlawyer.com.

ZIMBABWE MEDIA COMMISSION

[10th February 2020]

Parliament Invites Public to Nominate Candidates for Appointment

to the Zimbabwe Media Commission

The Constitution, in section 248, tells us that there is a Zimbabwe Media Commission known as the Zimbabwe Media Commission consisting of:

1. a)a chairperson appointed by the President after consultation with Parliament’s Committee on Standing Rules and Orders; and
2. b)eight other members appointed by the President from a list of not fewer than twelve nominees submitted by the same Committee.

In fact, however, the Commission has had neither a chairperson nor any other members since the 31st December 2014, when the terms of office of the previous chairperson and members expired.  The staff of the Commission, including its Chief Executive Officer, Dr T. , have continued to carry out at least some functions of the Commission, such as accrediting journalists.

At long last steps are being taken to remedy this unsatisfactory and unconstitutional state of affairs, probably because the Government’s Bill to operationalise the Commission currently awaiting attention by Parliament: the Zimbabwe Media Commission Bill [link].  A few days ago the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders published advertisements in newspapers calling on the public to nominate persons for its consideration for inclusion on the list of twelve nominees to be submitted to the President.  The full advertisement is set out below, but important points to note are:

1. a)there is a deadline – nominations must be received at Parliament before end of business hours on Friday 28th February 2020;
2. b)an official nomination form must be used – this may be obtained from Parliament [details in the advertisement] or can be downloaded from the Veritas website [link].

Parliament’s Advertisement

CALL FOR PUBLIC NOMINATIONS FOR PERSONS TO SERVE ON ZIMBABWE MEDIA COMMISSION

The Committee on Standing Rules and Orders (CSRO) of the Parliament of Zimbabwe is mandated in terms of sections 237 and 258 of the Constitution, to nominate candidates for appointment by His Excellency, the President, to serve as Commissioners on the Zimbabwe Media Commission provided for in Chapter 13 Part 5 of the Constitution.

Vacancies have arisen in the Zimbabwe Media Commission after the expiry of the term of office of the Commissioners.

Accordingly, the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders is hereby calling on the Public to nominate persons to be considered for appointment to this Commission.

The functions of the Commission and the person specifications are given below.

Functions of the Zimbabwe Media Commission (section 248 of the Constitution)

“(1)  The Zimbabwe Media Commission has the following functions —

1. a)to uphold, promote and develop freedom of the media;
2. b)to promote and enforce good practices and ethics in the media;
3. c)to monitor broadcasting in the public interest and, in particular, to ensure fairness and diversity of views broadly representing Zimbabwean society;
4. d)to encourage the formulation of codes of conduct for persons employed in the media and, where no such code exists, to formulate and enforce one;
5. e)to receive and consider complaints from the public and, where appropriate, to take action against journalists and other persons employed in the media or broadcasting who are found to have breached any law or any code of conduct applicable to them;
6. f)to ensure that the people of Zimbabwe have fair and wide access to information;
7. g)to encourage the use and development of all the officially recognised languages of Zimbabwe;
8. h)to encourage the adoption of new technology in the media and in the dissemination of information;
9. i)to promote fair competition and diversity in the media; and
10. j)to conduct research into issues relating to freedom of the press and of expression, and in that regard to promote reforms in the law.

(2) An Act of Parliament may confer power on the Zimbabwe Media Commission to—

1. a)conduct investigations and inquiries into¾
2.         any conduct or circumstance that appears to threaten the freedom of the media; and
3.         the conduct of the media;

and

1. b)take or recommend disciplinary action against media practitioners who are found to have breached any law or any code of conduct applicable to them.

(3) An Act of Parliament may provide for the regulation of the media.”

Person Specifications

Members of the Zimbabwe Media Commission must be chosen for—

1. a)their integrity and;
2. b)their competence in administration and;
3. c)their knowledge and understanding of human rights issues and ;
4. d)their knowledge of the best practices in media matters.

Nomination material must consist of a typewritten submission of no more than two A4 pages long stating why the person nominated is a suitable candidate together with a completed nomination form which can be obtained at Parliament Offices (Counsel to Parliament – 3^rd Floor Room 306 or Human Resources – 4^th Floor Room 405) or downloaded from the website: www.parlzim.gov.zw

Nominations must be addressed to the Clerk of Parliament in sealed envelopes clearly marked with the name of the Commission. These may be emailed to [email protected], posted, or hand delivered to:

The Clerk of Parliament

Parliament of Zimbabwe

Parliament Building

Cnr. K. Nkrumah Avenue and Third Street

P.O. Box CY 298  Causeway  Harare

Closing date for the submission of nominations is end of business hours on Friday 28^th February 2020.

Other Relevant Points for Would-be Candidates and their Nominators

Ineligible persons [Constitution, section 320(3)]

The following persons are not eligible for appointment: members of Parliament, members of provincial or metropolitan councils, members of local authorities [city and town councillors, local board members, rural district councillors] and members of government-controlled entities [board members of parastatals and government-controlled companies].

Commission members to be non-political  [Constitution, section 236]

Commissioners must not, in the exercise of their functions, act in a partisan manner, further the interests of any political party or cause, prejudice the lawful interests of any political party or cause, or violate the fundamental rights or freedoms of any person.

A member of a political party or organisation may be appointed to the Commission, but must without delay and in any event within thirty days of appointment relinquish the membership – failure to relinquish within 30 days means automatic and immediate forfeiture of the appointment.  If a Commission member becomes a member of a political party or organisation, he or she immediately ceases to be a  Commission member.

Term of office and remuneration  [Constitution, section 320)

The term of office is five years, renewable only once.  Remuneration, allowances and other benefits are fixed by or under an Act of Parliament.  The current – and unsatisfactory – Zimbabwe Media Commission Bill states that Commission members, other than the chairperson, must not be full-time, but does not make provision for fixing remuneration or allowances.

What Happens after Parliament Receives Nominations?

Section 237(1) of the Constitution spells out what must happen after the Committee receives nominations.  The procedure is the same for all five Chapter 12 independent commissions.

Once nominations have been received from the public, the Committee will have to conduct public interviews of prospective candidates, prepare a list of at least twelve nominees for appointment, and then submit the list to the President.

The President can choose any eight appointees from the list submitted but his choice is restricted to the persons on the list – and there is no provision allowing the President to request the Committee to compile a fresh list.

In the light of the five-year delay that has already occurred, it seems appropriate to remind all involved that section 324 of the Constitution lays down that all constitutional obligations must be performed diligently and without delay.

Appoint of Commission Chairperson

The procedure for the appointment of the chairperson of the Commission is separate and different.  It is a matter for the President’s discretion but the President’s decision must be made after consultation with the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders. Section 339(2) of the Constitution stipulates how this consultation must be conducted but leaves the final decision to the President, who is not obliged to follow any recommendations made by the Committee.

Veritas makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied.

Post published in: Featured

PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES SERIES 3/2020

[11th February 2020]

Open Committee Meetings on Thursday 13th February

There will be three committee meetings open to the public on Thursday 13th February. 

The meetings will be held in Parliament Building, Harare, on the dates and at the times and venues indicated below. 

Members of the public may attend these meetings – but as observers only, not as participants, i.e. they may observe and listen but not speak. If attending, please use the entrance to Parliament on Kwame Nkrumah Ave between 2nd and 3rd Streets. Please note that IDs must be produced.

The details given in this bulletin are based on the latest information from Parliament. But, as there are sometimes last-minute changes to the meetings schedule, persons wishing to attend should avoid disappointment by checking with the committee clerk that the meeting concerned is still on and open to the public. Parliament’s telephone numbers are Harare 2700181 and 2252940/1.

Reminder: Members of the public, including Zimbabweans in the Diaspora, can at any time send written submissions to Parliamentary committees by email addressed to [email protected] or by letter posted to the Clerk of Parliament, P.O. Box 298, Causeway, Harare or delivered at Parliament’s Kwame Nkrumah Avenue entrance in Harare.

Thursday 13th February at 10.00 am

Portfolio Committee: Youth, Sports and Recreation

Oral evidence from the Ministry of Youth, Sport, Arts and Recreation on the programmes and projects being implemented by the Ministry on youth empowerment.

Venue: Committee Room No.  2.

Portfolio Committee: Industry and Commerce 

Oral evidence from the  Minister of Industry and Commerce on the Community Share Ownership Trusts.

Venue: Committee Room No.  1.

Thematic Committee: Indigenisation and Empowerment

Oral evidence from the  Ministry of Industry and Commerce on the Community Share Ownership Trusts.

Venue: Committee Room No. 3.

 

Veritas makes every effort to ensure reliable information, but cannot take legal responsibility for information supplied.<

Post published in: Featured

Court reporters and stenographers are a staple of the legal profession. While they’re usually just extras in the courtroom drama filling lazy afternoons on TNT, in the real world, stenographers are essential contributors to a functioning justice system and they take their skills to arbitrations or depositions as well. They may not all be able to transcribe this quickly, but they take days worth of the nonsense we spout and turn it into a transcript and that’s an epic achievement.

But the occupation is, sadly, thinning out. Court reporters used to be trained at an impressive clip, graduating from schools focused on keeping the legal profession flush with support talent. It’s still not a bad way to earn a paycheck — it’s a specialized skill set that commands solid compensation — but it just isn’t exciting the youth as much as it did in bygone days.

And that’s led to a shortage that will transform into a crisis soon with a retiring population of experienced reporters and very few new graduates replacing them. For a while, court reporters have worried that technology — specifically voice-recognition software — would replace them. It turned out to be the wrong fear.

First of all, court reporters are still going to be necessary in some form or another regardless of the technological advancements on the horizon. There are basically three methods of taking a record: Stenography, a Steno Mask, and High-fidelity audio capture coupled with voice recognition.

What’s a “Steno Mask” you may be asking?

It looks weird, but it produces solid results:

MR. WILSON: At what time did you return home on the evening of the 28th?
WITNESS: Around, um, uh, 10:30.
MR. WILSON: PM?
WITNESS: Oh, yes, at night.
MR. WILS—- Oh, you think darkness is your ally. But you merely adopted the dark; I was born in it, molded by it. I didn’t see the light until I was already an accredited stenographic professional, by then it was nothing to me but BLINDING!
COURT: Excuse me, Court Reporter… what were you just mumbling?

But all of these methods, still require a human being. The stenographic transcript for obvious reasons. The mask needs someone to look ridiculous for our benefit. And even audio capture requires an officer to make annotations, correct spellings, deal with proper nouns, and enter exhibits.

Last week at the Legalweek 20 show, I sat down with the folks from Veritext Legal Solutions to discuss the world of reporting and learned that they see the profession as changing but still critically important. But everyone needs to be aware of the tools that will drive this profession going forward. “The key is awareness and adoption,” CTO Tony Donofrio told me.

It’s not like court reporting isn’t a technology driven occupation now. Just because it’s over 100 years old doesn’t mean it’s not tech. While the profession is currently declining in numbers, it’s not as though alrternative technologies are responsible. Videographers have been around for years and haven’t killed off the profession generally. There still needs to be a trained individual acting as an officiant to capture and facilitate the proceedings.

Streaming internet may be killing broadcast television, but it’s not killing television production. The actors, writers, and producers just moved to Netflix. The future aspiring court officers need to understand that the limited part of the job that included understanding quirky typing will be replaced by managing a complex system of microphones and digital capture. The rest of the job stays the same.

Most importantly, Veritext stressed that people need to understand that human court reporters are important. AI and text processing can’t fully replace the human touch today even if that were all there was to the job of court reporting. As human court reporters retire, we need more people entering the profession with an open mind and willing to learn the new tools replacing the stenographic typewriter.

An open mind… and maybe a willingness to wear a muzzle. Now that’s something technology can happily replace.

Earlier: The Fastest Court Reporter In The World
Court Reporter Causes Chaos By Repeatedly Writing ‘I Hate My Job’ On Trial Transcripts

---

Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you’re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.

Last month, former Biglaw partner Kym Cushing was suspended from the practice of law by the Supreme Court of Nevada for nine months. The court’s suspension comes after serious concerns about Cushing’s addiction issues and honesty.

According to the court’s opinion, Cushing, who worked at Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker from 2005 to 2018, wrote three checks to himself from the firm’s operating account. When confronted about the checks, Cushing first told the firm they were to reimburse expert witness outlays, naming a friend (and pro bono client) as the expert. However, Cushing later told the firm the checks were to cover gambling losses. As a result, the firm asked him to resign.

After being forced out at Wilson Elser, he rebounded with a position at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith. However, during the lateral move, Cushing failed to disclose why he left his old firm. This was rectified by Wilson Elser, who reportedly shared with Lewis Brisbois the circumstances surrounding Cushing’s departure. Cushing no longer works at Lewis Brisbois.

Cushing later rescinded his gambling losses explanation for his behavior, saying in a demand letter to the law firm seeking $5 million in compensation for alleged age and disability discrimination and retaliation that he claimed a gambling problem to save his job. He now claims he actually wrote the checks in a “drunken stupor.” Additionally, he claimed he turned to alcohol to deal with the stress of the “go-to attorney” for difficult cases.

In 2018, Cushing’s behavior was first brought to the Supreme Court of Nevada. Then Cushing agreed to treatment with the Nevada Lawyers Assistance Program to avoid suspension. Unfortunately, Cushing did not follow through with the program and lied about his reasons for doing so.

All of which brings us to the instant case. As reported by Bloomberg Law, the court felt this history was enough to warrant the nine-month suspension:

“Substantial evidence” supports the disciplinary panel’s findings that Cushing’s mental state was “intentional and that his misconduct harmed the public and the legal profession and potentially harmed his pro bono client,” the court said in determining the sanction. It conceded, however, that there were mitigating factors including his emotional problems and lack of prior discipline.

Cushing, who says he is “extremely disappointed” with the decision, can apply for reinstatement, provided he completes the Nevada Lawyers Assistance Program, an anger management program, and an additional 10 hours of CLE credits, five hours of which must be on the subject of substance abuse.

---

Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, and host of The Jabot podcast. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email her with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter (@Kathryn1).

If you were wondering whether someone could go Wilbur Ross one better and just start outright rooting for Chinese people to die, wonder no more.

“We should take our supplies and go back home. Let the chinese virus rampage through the ranks of the GT and the rest of the communist party,” the founder and chief investment officer of Dallas-based Hayman Capital Management wrote.

In fairness to Kyle Bass, he was obviously speaking out of anger: He was really, really hoping that President Trump’s trade deal with China would fall apart, not because he’s a particular fan of the president, but because he’s convinced that any deal with the Chinese is a lifeline keeping their economy afloat, and also one that they will inevitably flout. Plus, you could argue that the editor of the Chinese Communist Party’s Global Times started it by complaining about the U.S. government’s “belated” aid for the coronavirus outbreak in western China that has killed more than 800 people and countless vacation plans.

I would like to show my granddaughters that the equal citizenship stature of men and women is a fundamental human right. The union will be more perfect when that simple statement — that men and women are persons of equal citizenship stature — is part of our fundamental instrument of government. So even if the argument is it’s largely symbolic, it is a very important symbol.

— Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in comments given about the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) during a recent appearance at Georgetown Law. Ginsburg said that rather than try to get the 1970s version of the proposed amendment made part of the Constitution, she’d like to “see a new beginning” and “start over.” She continued, “There’s too much controversy about late comers. Plus, a number of states have withdrawn their ratification. So if you count a latecomer on the plus side, how can you disregard states that said we’ve changed our minds?”

(Thirty-eight states were needed to ratify the ERA, which was originally sent to states in 1972 with a seven-year deadline for ratification. That deadline was later extended to 1982, but not enough states followed through in time. Nevada (2017), Illinois (2018), and Virginia (2020) recently ratified the ERA, with Virginia becoming the last state needed for ratification. The Justice Department refused to accept the state’s approval, stating it came decades too late (not to mention the fact that five other states have moved to rescind their ratifications), and litigation has commenced.)

---

Staci Zaretsky is a senior editor at Above the Law, where she’s worked since 2011. She’d love to hear from you, so please feel free to email her with any tips, questions, comments, or critiques. You can follow her on Twitter or connect with her on LinkedIn.