A 22-year-old Dutch woman who reported being drugged and raped during a holiday in Qatar ended up being jailed herself for “illicit consensual fornication” and being “drunk in a public place.” The woman, identified only as “Laura,” has been in jail since March 14, and on Monday was handed a one-year suspended sentence, three years of probation, and a fine of about $823.

Protestors feared Laura, 22, would get sentenced to years of prison in Qatar, but Monday’s ruling means she can finally go home as she will be deported back to the Netherlands as soon as possible. A court official told Al Jazeera that the sentence was lenient, adding: “Had she been a Muslim woman, she would have received at least five years in jail. No one can get out of such charges here in Qatar.”

The case has given rise to strong reactions on social media under the hashtag #freelaura:

Dutch woman faces prison after being raped in Qatar for having "extramarital sex" – this needs to be covered by int'l media asap #freelaura

— Manya Koetse (@manyapan) June 11, 2016

Really #Qatar?! And u wonder why I have NO interest in exploring parts abroad. This! When ur jailed 4 reporting ur own rape #FreeLaura Smdh

— Kween Ka$h (@Kweendom) June 13, 2016

The Syrian man accused of raping her, Omar Abdullah al-Hasan, was sentenced a punishment of 100 lashes for extramarital sexual acts, plus 40 lashes for drinking in public, a severe crime in Qatar and other Muslim countries. He admitted to having had sex with the woman but not that it was by force. He was not charged with rape, and the subject didn’t even come up during the court hearing.

Laura was reportedly out at a hotel bar with a friend when she had a drink that made her feel strange. She said she woke up the next morning in a room she didn’t know, realizing she had been raped and probably drugged. When she went to the police, they arrested her.

The Dutch Embassy was involved at an early stage and has been in close contact with Laura and her family. Yvette Burghgraef-van Eechoud, the Dutch ambassador in Doha, said to CNN: “We will do everything we can to get her out of the country as soon as possible to where she says she wants to go.”

Another reason why we shouldn't play football in #Qatar. It's not safe for women! #freelaura

— Devi Boerema (@DeviBoerema) June 11, 2016

Qatar is set to host the World Cup soccer tournament in 2022, something that has led to protests among human rights activists concerning the death of migrant workers, corruption, and more. It has also caused concerns about how the country will deal with beer-loving soccer fans–and how fans will deal with strict sharia laws.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dutch Woman Jailed In Qatar After Being Raped To Be Sent Home appeared first on Law Street.

Michael Platini, former UEFA president, and Sepp Blatter, former FIFA president, were denied appeals on their ban from all football activities this week. However, the FIFA appeals committee did decide to reduce the ban from eight years to six, based on the duo’s “service to the game.” Both Platini and Blatter claim they are innocent and plan to appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport to lift their ban, but with the election of Gianni Infantino as President of FIFA, it appears that the soccer world is moving on without them.

Infantino was previously an adviser to Platini, but when seven of FIFA’s highest ranking officials were arrested five months ago, he transitioned from UEFA secretary general to the race for the FIFA presidency–a far more contentious position. Infantino’s primary competitor was Sheikh Salman, who ran on a platform of transforming FIFA from a Euro-centric governing body to a truly international organization that would recognize the interests of soccer around the world. Despite this noble ideal of creating a more equitable soccer world, Sheik Salman did not build the solid constituency that Infantino managed to construct.  This could be attributed to Sheik Salman’s allegedly checkered past when it comes to human rights–he was connected with the jailing and torture of Bahraini athletes who peacefully protested against his family during the Arab Spring.

Infantino has multiple issues to tackle during his first several weeks in office. The most immediate concern regards Russia and Qatar’s respective bids for hosting World Cups. The circumstances by which those countries secured the bids are under investigation by Swiss law enforcement, but the chance of FIFA reneging on the bids is relatively slim. Construction has already begun on stadiums and tourist attractions in Qatar, and although the working conditions on these construction sites have caused outrage among human rights activists, there is no sign of development slowing down.

A troubling prospect for the 2022 Qatar World Cup is that Platini and Blatter might be able to return to football just in time to participate in the tournament. The shortening of their sentences leaves the door open for them to participate, either within FIFA or through smaller organizations that will be working on logistical issues in Qatar. Argentina’s legendary Diego Maradona recently stated that he feels Platini and Blatter should receive life in prison for their abuse of power, and while that seems like an extreme reaction, it is clear to many that their current sentence is not a sufficient punishment for their crime.

Missing the 2018 Russia World Cup may be a blow to the egos of Platini and Blatter but if the two men are allowed to participate in the Qatari World Cup, they could be able to step back into their old habits without missing a beat. By 2022, Infantino may enact broad reforms of FIFA activity during his tenure but the return of Platini and Blatter would automatically undermine any of those actions. If the Court of Arbitration for Sport moves to completely overturn the ban on football related activities that was upheld this week, then FIFA may never escape its reputation for corruption.

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post FIFA 2016: Can Sepp Blatter and Michael Platini Get Back to Soccer’s Inner Circle? appeared first on Law Street.

Last week, Germany edged out a win against the United States in an intense soccer match that ultimately qualified both teams to the next level of competition. Here at Law Street, my coworker Trevor Smith and I decided to use this exciting World Cup game as an excuse to exercise our nerdy legal sides and compare drinking laws in the two nations. After interviewing the crowd at a watch party in DC’s DuPont circle, and researching each country’s laws, we think it is safe to conclude that Germany also wins the drinking law matchup.

In Germany, there are very few restrictions on public alcohol consumption. Most cities ban drinking in their public transit systems, but other than that, they allow drinking on the streets and in their parks. In the United States, there are a few states that allow public drinking in specific entertainment-designated areas, but that’s pretty much it. In DC, where we interviewed people viewing the Germany-U.S. game in a public park, the law states that alcoholic beverages cannot be open in any street, alley, park, sidewalk, or parking area.

The viewing party was the perfect place to interview soccer fans, as many had watched games in a similar locale in Germany, where they were able to have alcohol present. One onlooker told us that in Germany people would typically drink only to get tipsy because of the high alcohol prices at such events. He told us that the presence of alcohol at the events had no negative repercussions and that it made for a better experience. Another man, while motioning at the entire crowd, told us that in Germany, it was “this times 100,” and that it was one “big long party.” Another individual told us that this was “the perfect setting for a beer.”

All but one individual we interviewed told us that they would buy alcohol if it was for sale at the event. With hundreds of people present at the event, the city could have easily made thousands of dollars from alcohol sales, and would also have been able control the flow of alcohol present. That control is important, because there were clearly people in the crowd who brought their own alcohol. We saw beers emerging from bags and many people drinking from bottles that could have been filled with pretty much anything. Many of the people we interviewed said that they considered bringing their own alcohol from home, but decided not to for fear of getting caught by the police or fired

A couple of individuals weren’t so keen on alcohol being present at these kinds of events.  An older gentleman told us that,  “if alcohol is out of the system, everyone has more fun.” He also said that there was a different mindset abroad towards drinking. He thought that Americans would not be able to handle public drinking very well and that, “chaos would probably ensue, we tend to overdo it.” Another woman expressed concerns that Americans would not be able to adapt to open container laws at first, but said, “in the long run it would be a positive change, as people got used to their newfound freedom.”

One question that we asked every individual was if they thought open container laws should change or stay the same. Not surprisingly, all those we interviewed who have been abroad thought the United States should change its open container laws. There were also those who thought serving alcohol at public events should be reserved for viewing parties like the one we attended, but were hesitant to commit to the broad kind of laws Germany has.

Although there was no legal alcohol present at the viewing party, it was clear that everyone still had a great time. But, we do agree with the majority of the fans that were watching–alcohol could have both improved the game’s atmosphere and brought in revenue for the city. The stereotype of Americans as too rowdy, or too rambunctious, or too destructive is sometimes true, but only because we put alcohol on such a pedestal. There are high school kids in Germany who are able to buy a beer, and then walk down the street while drinking that beer, but many American college students can’t even walk into a bar. A more relaxed and normalized attitude towards drinking might keep people from overdoing it.

So maybe one day this will be the norm!

Check out the bracket below to see which countries that made it to the knockout stage have the most relaxed drinking laws. We created our bracket by examining which countries have the most generous laws when it comes to drinking in public and drinking age!

Round of 16:

Brazil vs. Chile

Winner: Brazil. In Brazil you’re allowed to drink in public places. Chile’s laws are a bit stricter–it’s usually illegal to drink publicly.

Colombia vs. Uruguay

Winner: Colombia. Both countries allow you to purchase and consume alcohol at the age of 18, but Uruguay loses this round because they’re trying to enforce stricter alcohol laws, like a ban on happy hour

France vs. Nigeria

Winner: Nigeria. In France you cannot drink in public, but Nigeria has much looser open container laws!

Germany vs. Algeria

Winner: Germany. Germany has a lower drinking age and more relaxed open container laws.

The Netherlands vs. Mexico

Winner: The Netherlands. The Netherlands has no national laws against drinking in public–although some cities have individual laws against it. Many areas in Mexico do not allow public drinking, so the Netherlands comes out on top.

Argentina vs. Switzerland

Winner: Switzerland. While open container laws don’t vary much between the two countries, you’re allowed to start drinking beer and wine at the age of 16 and spirits at 18.

Belgium vs. USA

Winner: Belgium. In Belgium you’re allowed to start drinking beer and wine at the age of 16, and liquor at 18. The United States requires an age of 21 for every type of alcoholic drink. Also public drinking is allowed in Belgium, unlike in the United States.

Greece vs. Costa Rica

Winner: Greece has open container laws allowing drinking outside. Costa Rica does not.

Quarter-Finals

Germany vs Nigeria

Winner: Germany. Both have open container laws, but the drinking age is two years earlier in Germany.

Greece vs. Netherlands

Winner: Greece. In Greece, you can buy alcohol at 18 in a bar, but there is no age limit to buying alcohol at liquor stores. The Netherlands has much stricter laws.

Switzerland vs. Belgium

Winner: Belgium. While both have similar drinking and open container laws, it is more socially acceptable to walk down the street with a beer in Belgium.

Colombia vs. Brazil

Winner: Colombia. Both are lenient when it comes to drinking, but some cities in Brazil, for example Recife, have started to crack down.

Semi-Finals

Greece vs. Belgium

Winner: Belgium. Belgium wins because in some places in Greece, public drinking is not socially acceptable, even if it is lawful.

Colombia vs. Germany

Winner: Germany. Germany wins, because you can buy and drink alcohol publicly at a younger age

Finals

Belgium vs. Germany

Winner: These two countries often debate who makes the best beer. But Germany wins this particular contest because of their lower drinking age.

Go forth and have fun! But make sure that you always follow the local drinking laws, regardless of where you are, and stay safe whenever you consume alcohol!

—

Matt DeWilde (@matt_dewilde25) is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Trevor Smith (@TSmith1211) is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Neil Cooler via Flickr]

Matt DeWilde

Matt DeWilde is a member of the American University class of 2016 majoring in politics and considering going to law school. He loves writing about politics, reading, watching Netflix, and long walks on the beach. Contact Matt at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The World Cup of Drinking Laws appeared first on Law Street.