Saturday, October 8, 2011

Student sues Johnson County Community College over charges for documents

Posted by Ben Palosaari on Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 1:45 PM

JCCC's e-mails are the caviar and champagne of public documents.

How much do you figure it would it cost to obtain a day's worth of e-mails between two faculty members at Johnson County Community College? Oh, only about 10 grand. Seriously. The Campus Ledger, the JCCC student newspaper, reports that a former employee is suing over charges that the school hit him with when he requested the public records.

Marcus Clem asked the school for many documents and e-mails, including one day's worth of e-mails between two employees in the school's Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion. The school said they could fulfill the request if Clem would fork over a mere $9,745.96. Again, that is for the single day's e-mail exchange — about 20 messages — between two employees. Clem also requested seven months' worth of documents and e-mails, and the school estimated the costs would reach $47,426. It wasn't hard for Clem and the Student Press Law Center to call "bullshit" on the school and file a lawsuit.

JCCC president Terry Calaway told The Ledger that the school was acting in good faith on the request, but the e-mails are stored on backup tape, which somehow makes digging them up labor-intensive. "To suggest that there’s something in there that we’re trying to hide is just absolutely ridiculous and irresponsible,” he told the paper. He added: "The college takes it responsibility very seriously to have to respond to these open-records requests, and we do it to the best of our ability to collect the information." Well, he's right to say the school responded. But if it takes $10,000 to dig up 20 e-mails, he might want to shake up the public records department.

The school's executive vice president of administrative services, Joe Sopcich, sent the Student Press Law Center an itemized bill explaining the costs. But, as you can see below, it sheds little light on why the e-mails are so pricey. (KORA is the Kansas Open Records Act.)

Frank LoMonte, SPLC executive director, said in a press release that JCCC's charges are ridiculous. "Without knowing what's going on behind the scenes, one of two things is clear. Either the college is overcharging for these records, in hopes that the students will shut up and go away, or it's overcharging in hopes of turning the open-records act into a profit center," he said.

Clem told the school paper that he thinks the school is trying to hide something in the e-mails. JCCC denies that they have anything to hide, and that Clem is suing to be a pain in the ass because his mother was fired from a position at the school. From the paper:

"To be honest with you, my position without having looked at it is, I think it’s a personal vendetta with Marcus related to the college and his mother’s termination," Calaway said. "I don’t think it has anything to do with anything else. His court request was related to something different. Quite frankly, that’s been our experience with him over the last couple of years."

Even if that's the case, these prices are steep. But, LoMonte said on the SPLC website, this kind of pricing is becoming more common. "We're seeing this phenomenon all over the country, where agencies are ringing up these jackpot bills for records, and it seems like public watchdogs are being seen as an easy way for an agency in a budget crunch to turn a quick buck. Public records belong to the public, and there's not supposed to be a mark-up so that agencies can make a windfall profit by selling the public's own information back to us," he said.

That's a pretty sweet racket.

Please link to original source here

.......................................................
Law Journal of Cambodia(LJC) is a non-political and independent team who volunteer working for disseminating laws and informaton regarding development and human rights situation in Cambodia. All comment or idea of LJC cannot be claimed in front of court and other purpose. LJC just provide ways for people to understand the context of law and other issues. LJC wants people to understand the law and live in peaceful means. If you need inquiry, please drop your e-mail to cambodianlawjournal@gmail.com. Welcome all comments on this blog

Friday, October 7, 2011

BECOMING A LEGAL SCHOLAR

What does it take to become a law professor? With the publication of Brannon Denning, Marcia McCormick, and Jeffrey Lipshaw’s Becoming A Law Professor: A Candidate’s Guide[1] we can now say, as academics do, that there is a literature on this question. Previously much of the advice on

this topic consisted of postings to blogs and other websites, albeit comprising probably the most detailed set of writings law professors have created in that medium[2].

The arrival of a “monograph” pulls this body of advice together, organizes it, adds substantially to it, and supplies a handy tool for the kit of any aspiring professorial candidate. The guide’s authors have

performed a service for which the hundreds of teaching aspirants who enter the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) pool each season will owe them gratitude. In the style of a backpacker’s guide—with the voice of intrepid reporters whose blisters have turned to calluses—their

book hits the key points one needs to know to pass through the land of hiring in the legal academy without falling victim to common injuries, fatigue, hazards, and mistakes that are easily avoidable with proper preparation and local knowledge.

But Becoming A Law Professor and its progenitors in the blogosphere have a tendency to slip much too quickly past a question that must arise well before one begins packing one’s bags for this journey. The question of what it takes to become a law professor turns on what kind of law professor one means to be. This prior question extends deeper than the standard formal distinctions among categories of law faculty that the literature does a good job of explaining[3]

Even with fully tenured faculty, there is—if we are honest with ourselves—a distinction between those

with the goal of a professorship only and those who strive to become scholars of law. The latter category includes those whose work will be read and valued by others who work in the same field, and whom other faculties would like to have present work at their schools, perhaps visit for a semester or a year, and even hire laterally. The distinction here has at least partial connection to quality of law school, but we need not nail that down at the level of rankings; it will be sufficient to agree that the

distinction exists.

Becoming A Law Professor crystallizes two related issues that have been bothering me about the emerging literature on how to become a law professor, one having to do with the production of law professors and the other having to do with the American meritocracy generally.

My first difficulty is that the literature, in spite of being crammed to the gills with pointers and commands of all sorts, from how to cultivate persuasive recommenders (pp. 34-35, 43-44) to how to navigate the elevators of a particularly crucial hotel in Washington, D.C. (pp. 46-49), doesn’t give the poor candidates an answer to their real question. How does one become a law professor—or at least one who is a genuine scholar of law?

The answer, as anyone who has been through this market in at least the last decade or two well knows, can be expressed in a single word: write (before you seek a job). Every bit of guidance to the market

emphatically says this, including Becoming A Law Professor (p. 28). Of course, “write” is no answer at all. That’s like telling someone who wants to know how to become a pianist, “Play.”

Let’s call this deficit in the literature the Rumpelstiltsk in problem. Like the king in the Grimms’ tale, the existing guidance tells the candidate (the miller’s daughter) what she must do in order to realize her intense desire for a teaching job (keen wish not to be executed): publish serious work (spin straw into gold). And then it reminds her of this at about the top of every hour.

The literature doesn’t seem to do a lot more on this front than the fairy tale. It sends the candidate off to, one imagines, a shuttered and perhaps bleak place and tells her to come back with gold. Indeed, reality is worse than the fairy tale. There will be no magical being who appears in the grim chamber to offer the aspiring professor publication in the Harvard Law Review in exchange for her first-born child.

ADHOC staffs were summonsed before the court again on Oct 13, 2011 at Ratanakiry provincial court

Last month, ADHOC issued its appeal to the public about the Ratanakiry provincial court summonsed ADHOC and Journalist to be in front of court but later on, the court delayed the proceeding without providing reason. Now, the time is coming again that ADHOC staff and Journalist of RFA are summonsed to be appeared before the court.

It is a second time in relation to the summons for questioning at Rattanakiri provincial court, of two human rights defenders working for the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC) in Rattanakiri Province. The two men were due to appear in court on 19 September 2011 subject to charges of incitement but the hearing was delayed and will now be held on 13 October. The charges against the two men were brought in 2009 and relate to a land dispute in Rattanakiri province affecting large numbers of indigenous people. The case was postponed in 2009 and since then the investigative judge who originally charged the men, retired and was replaced by Mr. Loch Lau.

Despite delays, Mr. Pen Bonnar and Mr. Chhay Thy are still hopeful that their names will be cleared on the revised date of 13 October in Rattanakiri provincial court. Nevertheless this remains a sensitive case and one that highlights the use of the judiciary to silence dissent in Cambodia. Due to the nature of the case and upon the requests of the two human rights defenders involved, ADHOC has refrained from speaking out too forcefully on the issue. Nonetheless we realise the importance of disseminating accurate information, and therefore as a reminder please find attached the statement outlining the background of the land conflict in the area and the charges of incitement against Mr. Pen Bonnar, Mr. Chhay Thy and journalist Mr. Ratha Visal.

ADHOC is sure that you will once again understand the gravity of this situation for the three men involved, and for all human rights defenders in Cambodia.

For more information, please contact ADHOC central office in Phnm Penh directly.

.......................................................

Law Journal of Cambodia(LJC) is a non-political and independent team who volunteer working for disseminating laws and informaton regarding development and human rights situation in Cambodia. All comment or idea of LJC cannot be claimed in front of court and other purpose. LJC just provide ways for people to understand the context of law and other issues. LJC wants people to understand the law and live in peaceful means. If you need inquiry, please drop your e-mail to cambodianlawjournal@gmail.com. Welcome all comments on this blog

Thursday, October 6, 2011

CCHR Releases Briefing Book for Donors and Others on the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations and the Shrinking Space for Civil Society in Cambodia

CCHR Press Release – Phnom Penh, 6 October 2011

CCHR Releases Briefing Book for Donors and Others on the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations and the Shrinking Space for Civil Society in Cambodia

Dear all,

Today the Cambodian Center for Human Rights (“CCHR”), a non-aligned, independent, non-governmental organization (“NGO”) that works to promote and protect democracy and respect for human rights throughout Cambodia, releases a briefing book titled “Briefing Book for Donors and Others on the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations and the Shrinking Space for Civil Society in Cambodia” (the “Briefing Book”) – please see attached.

The Briefing Book discusses the threat posed to civil society and democratic space in Cambodia in light of recent actions by agencies of the Royal Government of Cambodia (“RGC”) and the controversial draft Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (“LANGO”). Primarily, the Briefing Book focuses upon: (1) the ongoing efforts to silence NGOs and dissenting voices, as well as the erosion of democratic space in Cambodia; (2) the fundamental deficiencies in the most recent draft of the LANGO; and, most importantly, (3) the improper use to which the LANGO may be put, given the current context. The conclusions as to the danger that the LANGO poses to civil society and to donor programs – as highlighted by recent events – are fully documented through Annexes to the Briefing Book available on Sithi – the award-winning Cambodian Human Rights Portal hosted by CCHR – at www.sithi.org/annex_view.php.

Even if the LANGO is improved, those amendments are unlikely to correct the primary harm that it represents. The statements made by the RGC regarding how the LANGO will be applied, and “who should be afraid of it” make clear that it will be used to stifle advocacy NGOs that hold the RGC accountable. Recent events demonstrate that minor technical defects – real or imagined – can and will be used selectively to silence those critical of the RGC.

Most importantly, however, the LANGO is not the central issue here. Regardless of whether or not the RGC revises the LANGO to take into account donors’ and civil society’s original recommendations and suggested amendments, recent events have made clear that the critical concern is the rapid and continuing erosion of democratic space in Cambodia and the RGC’s attempt to exert total control over civil society to the detriment of a wide range of stakeholders. If this is allowed to happen, a multitude of negative consequences will result: reduced delivery of aid to the neediest Cambodians, the deterioration of human rights, an increase in corruption, a loss of opportunities for Western businesses, and a loss of influence for Western nations.

The recent experience of the World Bank makes clear that if donors take strong action, there is a good chance that they will favorably influence the RGC. The donors need to use their funds and influence to ensure the survival of civil society and democratic space in Cambodia.

http://www.cchrcambodia.org/index.php?url=media/media.php&p=press_detail.php&prid=197&id=5

Late November deadline for property tax payment

Original source from Phnom Penh Post

THURSDAY, 06 OCTOBER 2011 12:00

LIAM BARNES AND MAY KUNMAKARA

The collection period of the recently implemented property tax has been extended to late November to give homeowners more time to pay the tax, according to a government statement released this week.

The collection period was slated to finish at the end of September, but confusion and a lack of understanding among taxpayers has led to the postponement of the due date, Mey Vann, director of the Department of Finance Industry in the Ministry of Finance and Economy told the Post yesterday.

“We don’t have any problems. We’ve just given people additional time to pay the tax to make it more convenient for them,” he said.

The ministry had been informed that a number of taxpayers were struggling to understand where and how to pay the tax, and that a number of the collection points were overcrowded, the statement said.
Mey Vann confirmed, however, that since the property tax prakas was released, collection figures had been positive.

“We have had no complaints about the tax – in fact, many obliging people have already paid. We just hope those who haven’t will pay on time,” he said.

Some industry insiders were in accordance with the government’s decision to extend the deadline.

“I think it’s possible that the property tax collection didn’t provide people with enough notice, and there were some misunderstandings regarding payment,” Sung Bonna, president of the National Valuers Association and CEO of the Bonna Realty Group, said yesterday.

He added that the extension would benefit the government, as more home owners would now be able to pay the tax.

Economy and Finance Minister Keat Chhon said at a real-estate workshop in Siem Reap in July that although the government would gain little profit from the tax, “it instils a tax culture in the Kingdom, curbs unprofessional real-estate development and speculative purchases.”

The tax expected to boost federal coffers by an estimated US$4 million according to estimates from the Ministry of Economy and Finance.

Luxury hotel ‘breaking law’

Original source from Phnom Penh Post

THURSDAY, 06 OCTOBER 2011 12:02

THIK KALIYANN AND DAVID BOYLE

The Angkor Village Hotel and Resort is breaking the law by refusing to reinstate 67 sacked workers that the Arbitration Council ruled were unlawfully dismissed, Siem Reap’s deputy governor claimed yesterday.

After attending a protest of hotel workers and supporters outside the hotel in Siem Reap town yesterday, Kim Chhay Heang said company owner Tep Vantho had simply ignored orders from his office to abide by an Arbitration Council decision and Cambodian law.

“The owner didn’t listen to what we said or what we’ve commanded, she had a purpose to act against the law, and she blamed authorities for allowing workers to hold a demonstration in a tourism city like this,” he said.

At the protest, sacked workers, supporters and union officials distributed leaflets to international tourists seeking their support in their fight to force Tep Vantho to reverse the allegedly illegal mass termination of 67 her employees.

The workers were sacked between July and August after some of them began establishing a union, though Angkor Village Hotel and Resort’s owners have claimed their dismal was due to unrelated misconduct including, in some case, attempts to poison the management.

Tep Vantho did not answer phone calls yesterday.

Article 266 of the Trade Union Law gives employees “without distinction whatsoever” the right to form unions while articles 279 and 280 strictly forbid an employer from interfering with unions or using a worker’s association with one to dismiss them.

In a non-binding ruling of the Arbitration Council handed down on August 16, the hotel was ordered to reinstate and give back pay to the sacked workers.

Dave Welsh, country director of the American Centre for International Labor Solidarity, said Tep Vantho was clearly in breach the Trade Union Law.

“The union was legally formed, once legally formed not only does [the employer] have an obligation to acknowledge it, they have an obligation to begin collectively bargaining with it. What they did was sack 85 percent of their staff,” he said.

Late last month, after another protest, Kim Chhay Heang said his office would order Tep Vantho to reinstate the workers because the dispute was creating an ugly spectacle in Cambodia’s premier tourism destination.

Sok Narith, Deputy Secretary of the Cambodian Tourism and Service Workers Federation, vowed yesterday to continue his protest for days on end until Tep Vantho caved into their demands.

“We will spend two hours in the morning and another two hours in the afternoon to protest and after that we will parade in the city everyday to spread news to local residents as well as international tourists” he said.

Three pick-up trucks filled with police armed with riot shields had come and entered the hotel to ensure violence didn’t break out but had not been forced into action, he said. “Our purpose is just that we want to get our jobs back, I don’t want to affect tourism in this city or affect tourists’ experience,” he added.

Dave Welsh said it was “outrageous and somewhat ironic” that foreign owned, multinational hotels collectively bargained with employees and abided by labour laws while a privately-owned Cambodian company seemed happy to violate them.

Last month, six union representatives were summonsed to Siem Reap provincial court on charges stemming from a complaint made by Tep Vantho that they made death threats, illegally demonstrated, incited people to perform criminal acts and destroying the individual interests of the owner and other staff. No verdict had been reached in the case and the suspects have not been detained.

Wednesday, October 5, 2011

WTO calls for dumping law

Original source from Phnom Penh Post Wednesday, 05 October 2011 12:00

May Kunmakara

Photo by: Heng Chivoan

Twenty-foot equivalent units are placed on a flatbed truck for shipment at the Sihanoukville Autonomous Port in July.

World Trade Organisation offic-ials have urged Cambodia to implement a trade remedy law to curb unfair competit-ion from foreign products.

Such a law would significantly protect the Kingdom from foreign exporters who undercut domestic prices – a tactic known as price dumping – World Trade Organisat-ion Rules Division counsell-or Müslüm Yilmaz said at a workshop on trade remedies in Phnom Penh yesterday.

“I think it’s important for a country like Cambodia to consider this to prevent the Kingdom’s industries suffering the injuries caused by dumping imposed by other countries,” Yilmaz said.

Cambodia would be able to monitor the effects of price dumping once a trade remedy law was in place, he said.

“Until the legislation is passed, it’s impossible for Cambodia to conduct an investig-ation and take measures.”

A number of countries in the region, such as Thailand, Mal-aysia and Indonesia, already had trade remedy laws, but it was not an obligation of WTO members, Yilmaz said.

Although the law was not a WTO requirement, it was essential for Cambodia to have it in place, Ministry of Commerce Secretary of State Pan Sorasak said.

“We need to have this law to protect ourselves from these problems, which are likely to occur when the price of any goods varies dramatically.”

Pan Sorasak said the government planned to pass a single law including three main components: countervailing measures, dumping measures and safeguard measures.

“We plan to pass it as soon as possible, containing a vis-ion on anti-dumping that will allow us to take up countervailing measures later.

“Although we still have much work to do to complete the draft, we clearly understand the challenges.”

Cambodia Chamber of Commerce director-general Ngoun Meng Tech objected to the approval of the law, saying: “In a free-market economy, the government cannot set up or ban the price of products.”

“If the government wants to prevent this kind of dumping, it should urge domestic producers to produce cheap, quality products to compete with imported ones,” Ngoun Meng Tech said.

He added that when prices dropped people could afford certain products, but said the government was not interes-ted in consumers.

“It merely protects businessmen, not normal consumers who want quality products at a cheap price.”