China's top court closed loopholes for bribing officials, issuing rules to stem rampant graft that threatens to undermine the Communist Party's grip on power.

The court and top prosecutor jointly issued the rules Sunday in an effort to "catch up with the tricks of wily, corrupt officials," the official Xinhua News Agency reported.

The rules widen the definition of bribery to include money, gifts or favors given to the family members or proxies of officials, or to officials after they retire.

Officials can be charged with graft even if they don't personally get a bribe, and the rules make it illegal to help officials covertly arrange bribes.

The rules come a month after President Hu Jintao stressed again that China must urgently tackle corruption, a deep-rooted problem the party has been battling publicly for a decade.

To fight corruption in the state-controlled media, the government posted on the Internet the names of all Chinese print and television journalists and listed the contact information for their organizations.

Shady dealings by media employees using the names of their newspapers have "marred the reputation of Chinese media," Xinhua reported Sunday, announcing the list.

Chinese reporters often cut deals to write positive stories or suppress negative news in return for bribes or promises to buy advertising in their publications.

Former Missouri Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronnie White said Monday that he is joining the law firm of Holloran, White & Schwartz LLP as a partner.

The Missouri Supreme Court announced in May that White planned to retire from the bench July 6.

White served from 2003 to 2005 as the state's first African-American chief justice. He was appointed to the court in October 1995. He previously served as a judge on the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District.

Partner Thomas Schwartz said in a statement, "Judge White will focus his practice on civil trials, appeals, and business litigation representing investors, shareholders and small business owners. As a former judge on both the Missouri Court of Appeals and the Missouri Supreme Court, his experience will make him a formidable advocate on the appellate level."

In addition to White, the firm is said it hired Justin Guerra as an associate. Guerra is a graduate of Saint Louis University School of Law and will focus on personal injury cases, including toxic tort, medical malpractice, workplace injuries and serious traffic accidents.

The firm also announced its recently moved to a new location at 2000 S. 8th in the Soulard neighborhood of St. Louis.

“We believe the Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB) reached erroneous conclusions that could have been corrected by seeking clarification from Orrick before LCB published its audit report,” said the letter from James Houpt.

But the letter went on to say that the law firm considers Nevada to be a valuable client, and the firm's “intent is not to risk that relationship.”

State Treasurer Kate Marshall said the check already has been deposited in a state bank account.

“They respectfully disagreed with the audit, but they also felt it was the right decision for them to make the overpayment identified in the audit,” Marshall told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “The state of Nevada is a little over $95,000 better off for it.”

As a result of the audit of the college savings program while under the review of then-Treasurer Brian Krolicki, Marshall sent a letter to the firm seeking a response.

Orrick had served as bond counsel to the state at the time the services were rendered for the program. The contract allowed the firm to provide legal services to other state agencies as well. The firm currently does not have any contract to serve as bond counsel with the state.

The treasurer's office is awaiting a response from another firm that did business with the state for the college savings program on a separate issue raised in the audit.

A Georgia consulting firm, GIF Services, was overpaid $300,000, according to the audit released in May.

The audit was sought by legislators after Marshall said in March that it appeared funds for the program were diverted for unauthorized legal expenditures and marketing costs.

The audit also raised the issue of whether Krolicki broke state law by not depositing $6 million in state-earned fees into the state treasury. The audit has been turned over to the attorney general's office for an investigation.

Krolocki, now lieutenant governor, has said he broke no laws in his management of the program during his eight years as treasurer.

The program was established by the 2001 Legislature to allow parents to invest money in mutual funds to build up college funds for their children.

None of the money that parents invested is missing or ended up in an improper account, according to the audit.

The complaint alleges that, between January 25, 2006 and July 27, 2006, Plexus failed to disclose that the company’s position in the defense market was weakening and that operations in the United Kingdom would have to be reorganized. Because of this information, Plexus lacked a “reasonable basis” for the positive statements it made during that period about the company’s future growth.

According to the complaint, Plexus “shocked investors” when, on July 27, 2006, the company lowered its earnings outlook for the year, based in part on limited revenue growth. The plaintiff alleges that this news caused shares of the company’s stock to fall $10.71 per share, or approximately 32 percent, to close at $22.89 per share.

The complaint alleges that, in a conference call following the July 26 quarterly report, Dean Foate, president, CEO and chairman of the board of directors, said that fourth quarter revenue outlook was softer than had been previously implied.
Foate and F. Gordon Bitter – chief financial officers – and John Nussbaum, who also served as chairman of the board, are all named individually as defendants.

The complaint alleges that because Foate, Bitter and Nussbaum controlled the contents of the company’s reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the public, they had the opportunity to correct the statements. According to the plaintiff, the defendants knew that the statements made by Plexus were “materially false and misleading.” 
The suit also accuses corporate officers and board members of insider trading, alleging that company officers were motivated to misrepresent revenue growth to allow company insiders to “sell 664,666 shares of their personally-held Plexus common stock for gross proceeds in excess of $26.3 million.”

The suit claims that Foate, Bitter and Nussbaum all benefited from selling stock during this period, as well as executive officers Michael Verstegen, Joseph Kronser, Thomas Czajkowski, David Clark, Paul Ehlers, David Rust, Joseph Kaufman, Simon Painter and George Setton and board members Ralf Boer, David Drury and Thomas Prosser.

The second lawsuit, filed June 29 by the Alan M. Ozell Trust, reasserts the accusation that Plexus withheld relevant information that caused the stock price to drop, but does not accuse anyone in the company of insider trading.

Both lawsuits request compensation for all damages in an amount to be proven at trial, as well as costs and expenses.
Plexus issued a statement on June 25 acknowledging that a class action complaint had been filed against the company, though Plexus claimed it had not yet received a copy of the complaint.

“Plexus believes that all of its public statements were correct and properly made; it thus intends to defend itself vigorously in this litigation,” according to the statement.

Angelo Ninivaggi, vice president, general counsel and secretary for Plexus, did not return a call requesting an updated statement.
The law firms of Ademi & O’Reilly, LLP and Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP are representing the plaintiffs in both cases. The lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

There is no such thing as 100 percent protection from the sun, the European Union's consumer chief warned holidaymakers on Monday and she banned the words "sunblock" and "100 percent sun protection" on sun cream.

Such labeling is misleading and contributes to thousands of deaths each year, Consumer Protection Commissioner Meglena Kuneva said.

"Consumers need clear, accurate information on sunscreen products so they can make informed choices," she said in a statement.

"There is no such thing as 100 percent protection and we need to reinforce that essential message. This is just one of a number of measures that are necessary for effective protection against the sun."

According to Cancer Research UK, the number of skin cancer cases in that country has more than doubled since the early 1980s with over 2,000 deaths from skin cancer each year.

Under the new rules, which came into force on Monday and will be phased in before the end of the year, the new labels will also include a new UVA logo and standardized terms such as "low," "medium," "high" and "very high" protection.

UVA is the term used for ultraviolet light that can cause chronic conditions such as the appearance of aging and interferes with the human immune system. 

UVB radiation is the cause of sunburn, but damages only the skin's outer layer or epidermis. Although both types of radiation are important contributors to the risk of skin cancer, experts believe UVA plays a bigger role.

The Commission said sunscreen products with only UVB protection may provide a false sense of safety because they do not protect against UVA radiation.

As labels for 2007 have already been printed, around 20 percent of sunscreen products on the shelves will feature the new labels.

"So for the moment consumers are advised to read labels very carefully during this summer," Kuneva said.

The trickle of Republican rebellion against President George W.Bush's Iraq policy has turned into a stream with two more previously loyal senators joining the swelling ranks ofcritics.

Lamar Alexander said "it should be clear to the President that there needs to be a new strategy", while Judd Gregg called for a "clear blueprint for how we were going to draw down".

Although they stopped short of backing the Democratic proposals for a fixed timetable of withdrawing US troops from Iraq, their comments came before a week in which the Senate is once again debating funding for the war and the military will deliver an interim progress report on Mr Bush's "surge strategy".

The interim report is believed to conclude that US combat deaths have escalated, violence has spread beyond Baghdad and sectarianism has further polarised Iraq, the Washington Post has reported.

It is also expected to acknowledge tacitly that the Iraqi Government is unlikely to meet any of the political and security goals Mr Bush set for it in January.

"The security progress we're making in Iraq is real," a senior intelligence official in Baghdad was quoted as saying, "but it's only in part of the country and there's not enough political progress to get us over the line in September."

Six Republican senators have now announced they can no longer support Mr Bush's Iraq strategy, and demanded change.

The dissent has been led by senior figures including Richard Lugar and John Warner, the Republican leaders - or "ranking members" - on the Senate foreign and armed forces committees.

Senator Lugar yesterday used a TV interview to explain that his public intervention had been intended as a "reaching-out to the President".

He suggested that remaining opportunities for a centrist "bipartisan consensus" on Iraq were fast disappearing before presidential elections next year in which Democrats are being pushed by activists to call for an immediate withdrawal of troops.

Along with other Republicans who have spoken out in recent days, such as George Voinovich and Pete Domenici, Senator Lugar appears to be advocating measures similar to those of last year's Iraq Study Group report.

That report proposed shifting American troops away from the sectarian conflict between Sunnis and Shi'ites so that a reduced force could concentrate on counter-terrorism and support functions.

"We have to be thoughtful about the safest route for our forces out of Iraq," Senator Lugar said, adding that most ofthe 160,000 US troops stationed in the country could be "redeployed by the middle part of next year".

Moderate Republicans fear that Mr Bush's apparent determination to fight on will lead to a panic pullout that could set off awider conflict across the MiddleEast.

But the White House is urging them to hold the line at least until September, when General David Petraeus will present his assessment of the effectiveness of the 30,000-troop "surge".

Mr Bush has repeatedly said he wants as much time as possible for his 30,000-troop increase to show results.

But the American military is already overstretched, with the Pentagon making troops serve longer in battle zones - and more often - as it tries to sustain the surge.

There is now growing pressure on Mr Bush to pre-empt the September report by setting out a time frame for withdrawing at least some of the troops.

Some Bush aides believe forces are combining against him as the Senate prepares to begin a contentious debate on the defence authorisation bill.

Democrats are gearing up for a new push for a US exit from Iraq amid a surge in bloodshed at the weekend.

With public discontent with the war growing, house Speaker Nancy Pelosi is set to introduce a bill to authorise troop redeployments to start within four months and be completed by April, a formula Mr Bush has blocked once with a presidential veto.

But aides are now believed to be advising Mr Bush that if he wants to forestall more defections, it would be wiser to announce plans for a more narrowly defined mission for US troops that would allow for a staged pullback, The New York Times reported yesterday.

The number of US combat brigades in Iraq is, in any case, scheduled to be reduced from 20 to 15 by this time next year.

Meanwhile, US military sources in Baghdad said fiery Iraqi Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, head of the the Mahdi Army militia insurgency group, has gone back to Iran. Sadr led two uprisings against US forces in 2004 before becoming more involved in mainstream politics.

The case, Corrie et al. v. Caterpillar, was filed in Seattle in 2005, but a district court dismissed it. After this hearing, the appeals court will rule whether the suit should be dismissed or sent back to the lower court.

Cindy and Craig Corrie, the woman's parents, allege Caterpillar violated human rights and committed war crimes by knowingly selling its equipment to the Israeli army, which used the bulldozers to raze Palestinian homes and endanger people. Rachel Corrie was run over by a bulldozer driven by an Israeli soldier as she tried to block a home from demolition.

"We are essentially arguing that you cannot knowingly provide substantial assistance — the means to commit war crimes, which is essentially what Caterpillar has done here," said Maria LaHood, with the Center for Constitutional Rights, on the Corries' legal team.

Israel said the death was an accident, according to The Associated Press. Caterpillar has said in the past that it can't be held responsible for how its bulldozers are used.

On Friday, a Caterpillar spokeswoman declined to comment on the development.

The Corries seek monetary damages in the civil suit, and they want to stop Caterpillar from selling its products to groups they say violate human rights. Four Palestinian families whose homes were bulldozed are also plaintiffs.

"We hope that this decision would mean eventually that Caterpillar shouldn't sell D9 bulldozers to Israel while they are using them to commit human-rights violations," LaHood said.

The death of The Evergreen State College student polarized political camps about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is not the first time corporations have been tried or held liable for their involvement in alleged human-rights violations or war crimes, LaHood said.

Three judges will hear arguments, and a ruling could take a few months, LaHood said.