In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: drones

06 Mar

Jordan I agree that the so-called test is not a limitation of the inherent right of self-defense under customary international law or Article 51 of the UN Charter. But if the rockets are flying across the border, for that time at least, the foreign state is decidedly "unable." Finally published: Operationalizing Use of Drones Against Non-State Terrorists Under the International Law of Self-Defense, 8 Albany Govt. L. Rev. 166-203 (215), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2459649 Enjoy! Shahram Thank you Kevin for drawing attention to the troubling methodology by which self-interested behavior of...
06.03.15 | |

04 Mar

...killing. People like to compare drone strikes to carpet bombing, but if drones were not available, would the United States carpet bomb Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia...? It is of course possible to construct scenarios in which the use of an autonomous weapon system might result in fewer deaths than the use of soldiers and human-controlled weapons. However, such scenarios are mostly dubious and artificial, and often rest on fatuous assertions, such as the claim that robots can make use of sensors not available to humans (as if humans cannot make use...
04.03.14 | |

10 Oct

John C. Dehn I am not on the inside of this debate, but I don't buy the constant meme from former Bush administration officials that debating the proper legal boundaries of our actions overseas is necessarily against our long (rather than short) term interests. We must remember that whatever rules we adopt will be used against us. We then must ask ourselves what those rules should be. What is a bit puzzling to me is that a country using drones to eliminate threats in un- or weakly governed foreign lands...
10.10.11 | |

12 Feb

Mihai Martoiu Ticu It strikes me how many Western intellectual jurists just accept that international law is dominated by power. Most of them don't even see how outrageous it is that individuals cannot sue states in an international court for human rights. Guantanamo, torture and killing with drones depend on the political ambitions of the US politicians, not on law. Mauritius cannot sue the UK at ICJ to get the Chagos back. This is another way how power works in international law. Jurists have internalized such facts as facts of...
12.02.13 | |

23 Nov

Mihai Martoiu Ticu Such sounds are welcome here. Until now we heard mostly people telling us that they are free to kill us with drones whenever they like, while they never think about the obvious that we should be able to sue them if we didn't agree with being killed. ==The West wants to hold the rest's use of internal force to international account, but exempt its own use of international force from independent accountability.== Indeed, maybe one could explain to me why can't Iraq sue the United States at...
23.11.10 | |

31 Aug

...triggered only to respond to large-scale atrocity crimes – genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. The examples he cites seem off point. But, yes, you make a good argument that (as with the use of drones), it is possible that other countries might in the future attempt to utilize precedent set by the U.S., and this clearly needs to be considered. I am not arguing that the US should be above the standards of international law (I actually would argue to the contrary – that it very...
31.08.13 | |

20 Sep

...or statement by the Special Rapporteur. But haven't we seen that before? Jordan Response... Instead of claiming no jurisdiction (and suffering foreign policy defeats), the U.S. should agree that human rights law applies during war BUT, on the merits, those who would be protected under, for example, the ICCPR must be within the "effective control" of the U.S. or its personnel and that those targeted by drones are not. Further, on the merits, they are not targeted arbitrarily and the human right to life is a right to freedom from...
20.09.11 | |

23 Nov

...for violations of their rights. For instance Guantanamo inmates should be able to sue the U.S., demand due process or demand to be released. The relatives of persons killed by drones should be able to sue U.S. and if the killing is unlawful, they should get compensation. Al-Adsani should be able to sue Kuwait. Etc. Liz Well, MMT, that would certainly make a compelling case for nation states to engage in proxy warfare to ameliorate the potential for culpability. As power is already devolving along with stability, I see no...
23.11.10 | |

02 May

...counter arguments for a trial, but nevertheless aosme sort of process even ex post would have respected rule of law instead of immeidate burial at sea - or any UArt 51 or AUMF authorization arguments that oks in Khanna's mind intrusion into Pakistan's territorial integrity. Such theories for "new rules" and norms are extremely premature and very dangerous especially when applied as practice in context to a highly unstable area of the world already feeling the heating of what are considered extra judicial killings from the use of unmanned drones....
02.05.11 | |

29 Aug

...function as of 12 August due to fuel shortages. Eight hospitals, including three in the southern suburbs of Beirut, were forced to close because bombs were falling around them daily.(27) One hospital, alleged by Israel to be a Hizbullah headquarters, was directly attacked. On 2 August, Israeli commandos in helicopters, supported by fighter planes and drones, raided al-Hikmah hospital in Baalbak in the eastern Bekaa valley. The Israeli army said they captured five Hizbullah members there. However, according to local residents, the five were not captured at the hospital but...
29.08.06 | |

12 Aug

Mihai Martoiu Ticu It’s a very dangerous technology. Imagine George Bush with electrodes on his head in the dock at ICC giving away that all he wanted was to rob Iraq and control the rest of the world instead of bringing democracy, freedom and fighting terrorism. Or imagine that Koh should have to deliver his speech about drones with such a device on his head and all the read leds detecting lies would explode. Benjamin Davis Orwell's Thought Crimes. Ugh! Best, Ben...
12.08.10 | |

06 Mar

...(discussing these cases (and relying on your great work on piracy)). Mihai Martoiu Ticu If I understand it correctly there is no problem in violating the sovereignty of other states when U.S. invades other countries for oil, kills people with drones, abducts, tortures and rapes El-Masri. One can even sue foreign states when designated by U.S. as terrorist. But sovereignty becomes a problem when big bucks are held accountable. Francisco Forrest Martin Prof. Kontorovich: U.S. v. Furlong addressed the crime of piracy, whereas the ATS is a civil statute. The...
06.03.12 | |