In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Recent Posts

10 Jun

[Lisa J. Laplante is Visiting Assistant Professor at Marquette University Law School] Until recently, immunity measures like amnesties were considered an acceptable part of promoting transitional justice in countries seeking to address past episodes of systematic violations of human rights.  The politically sensitive context of countries seeking to broker peace between oppositional forces often outweighed the moral imperative of punishing those...

|
09 Jun

I am briefly interrupting the erudite VJIL symposium to note that a task force announced by the administration to discuss and come up with ideas on how to address detention, Guantanamo, etc., is meeting today in DC.  I am unable to make it today, but supplied a number of comments via Ben Wittes, and I send it all good wishes...

|
09 Jun

I share Paul’s hope that my article will prompt further consideration of the use of IEEPA sanctions to address the problem of proliferation.  The article aims to demonstrate that the way E.O. 13,382 has been used so far is unlikely to prompt any successful legal challenge, but that does not mean the issue should not give us all pause.  Since...

|
09 Jun

[Paul B. Dean is Attorney-Adviser, Office of the Legal Adviser, at the U.S. Department of State] Thanks to Opinio Juris and VJIL for hosting this discussion and
thanks of course to Professor Guymon for raising this interesting topic.  I'm happy to provide what I hope will be a constructive response.  I
must emphasize that any views expressed herein are my own and not
necessarily...

|
09 Jun

The Public Editor of The New York Times has a nice piece today criticizing the newspaper's "seriously flawed and greatly overplayed" front-page article “1 in 7 Detainees Rejoined Jihad, Pentagon Finds.”  Others have thoroughly debunked similar Pentagon reports -- see here, for example.  I just want to call attention to the following paragraph from the Public Editor's article, which is...

|
08 Jun

I begin by thanking Ryszard Piotrowicz and Jean Allain for agreeing to take on the somewhat delicate task of commenting on my critique of James Hathaway’s article.  I am sure they will not be offended by my expressing sincere regret that Professor Hathaway himself declined to participate in this symposium. Neither respondent challenges (or seriously interrogates) my central conclusions: (i) Hathaway...

|
08 Jun

[Ryszard Piotrowicz is a Professor of Law at Aberystwyth University] I would like to make three points in relation to the articles by Prof. Hathaway and Dr Gallagher. First, It seems to me that Dr Gallagher effectively refutes the basic argument of Prof. Hathaway, that the developments in trafficking in human beings (THB) have served to distract attention from what is asserted...

|
08 Jun

[Dr. Jean Allain is a Reader in Public International Law at the School of Law, Queen’s University Belfast and author of The Slavery Conventions: The Travaux Préparatoires of the 1926 League of Nations Convention and the 1956 United Nations Convention (2008) and “The Definition of Slavery in International Law” 52 Howard Law Journal 239 (2009)] There is nothing like a ‘response’...

|
08 Jun

[Dr. Anne T. Gallagher is the Head of Operations at Equity International, Technical Director of Asia Regional Trafficking in Persons Project, and the former UN Adviser on Trafficking] My response to James Hathaway, written with the benefit of close involvement in the development of the new legal framework, as well as in its implementation at the national level in over forty...

|
08 Jun

The Virginia Journal of International Law is delighted to continue its partnership with Opinio Juris this week in this online symposium featuring three articles and two essays recently published by VJIL in Vol. 49:4, available here. Today, Dr. Anne T. Gallagher, Head of Operations of Equity International, Technical Director of Asia Regional Trafficking in Persons Project, and former UN Adviser on...

|
08 Jun

I'm not a comparative constitutional-law scholar, but I find it interesting that, pursuant to Section 44(iii) of the Constitution of Australia, no one can serve in Parliament who "[i]s an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent."  The solvency requirement harkens back to the bad old days of U.S. history, when most States prohibited individuals who did not own property from voting.  But...

|