Top of page

Global Legal Monitor: May Highlights

Share this post:

In May, twenty-five articles were published in the Global Legal Monitor (GLM), the Law Library’s online publication covering various legal developments around the globe.  The following is a list of the five most viewed articles in the order of their popularity:

  1. China: New Visa System Proposed, Public Opinion Being Solicited
  2. Brazil: No More Visa Cap for Haitian Citizens
  3. European Union: Response to Factory Collapse in Bangladesh
  4. Samoa: New Crimes Act Comes into Force
  5. Netherlands: Data Protection Act Amended.

Although not in the top five list, I found the following three articles particularly interesting:

  • The first article outlines a recent resolution issued by the Brazilian Federal Council of Medicine, an agency that regulates the medical profession in Brazil, allowing access to in vitro fertilization for gay couples and single persons.  However, the Council also imposed various limits.  Some of the limits include: it excludes from eligibility anyone above the age of 50; it requires mandatory informed consent for all individuals that undergo the procedure; and it maintains the right of doctors to refuse to provide the procedure.
  • The second article describes a recent measure in Sri Lanka to amend the country’s Constitution.  One of the proposed amendments seeks to reduce the length of a presidential term, now six years, to five; however, it does not impose a term limit.  The proposal also would impose a five-year term limit on the position of chief justice; at present the chief justice may remain in office until the mandatory retirement age of 65.
  • The third article discusses a recent Lesotho Constitutional Court ruling, which upheld as constitutional the Chieftainship Act, which reserves the right to inherit customary titles to a first born male offspring and denies the same right to a first born female child merely on basis of gender.  A first born female child of a late principal Chief, a key customary title, challenged the constitutionality of this law after being excluded from consideration to inherit her late father’s title.  Among others, she argued that this law should be struck down because it violated multiple provisions of the country’s Constitution including the freedom from discrimination clause, the right to equality before the law, and the equal protection clause.  In denying her petition, the Court found that the Law was not discriminatory to women because it allowed them to inherit customary titles as care takers in the absence of an eligible male.

Do not forget to tell us which of the May GLM articles you find interesting.

If you would like to follow legal developments around the globe, you can access Global Legal Monitor daily updates by visiting the Law Library website, signing-up for email alerts or RSS feeds.  If you’re on Twitter, you can access GLM articles through tweets via @lawlibcongress.

Add a Comment

This blog is governed by the general rules of respectful civil discourse. You are fully responsible for everything that you post. The content of all comments is released into the public domain unless clearly stated otherwise. The Library of Congress does not control the content posted. Nevertheless, the Library of Congress may monitor any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove content for any reason whatever, without consent. Gratuitous links to sites are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on the Library site. Read our Comment and Posting Policy.


Required fields are indicated with an * asterisk.