Search: {search_term_string}

...that is unduly prolonged constitutes a violation of the Declaration, this does not mean that any short-term detention is permitted by the Declaration, since the Working Group immediately clarifies that a detention where the detainee is not charged so that he can be brought before a court, is a violation of the Declaration.” (emphasis mine) Confusion has arisen due to the increased use of such short-term disappearances, as well as the inclusion of a temporal element in the Rome Statute.  In Article 7(2)(i) of the Rome Statute, the definition of enforced...

...administration’s on-offense approach) because, in a democracy, questions of such long term import finally have to be addressed by the legislature. In any case, if the Bush administration cares about having an impact on long term counterterrorism policy – if it cares, which seemingly it often does not, more about the substance of counterterrorism policy than a knee-jerk insistence on executive power – it should recall that what lives by executive discretion also dies by executive discretion. Policies in which this administration believes fervently but which it has failed to...

...thinking about border patrol, but here, the park services are thinking about fire patrols – an immensely expensive task from aircraft now, because of the vast areas to be surveyed in real time – but worth it because the faster the fire is spotted, the better the chance of containing it before it spreads. LIkewise, search and rescue for lost and injured back country hikers. That one is somewhat ahead of existing technology, for what the park services would ideally like, because flying in the steep valleys and canyons is...

...Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." Yet , legislator doesn't express fully his view , what is : unreasonable search ?? is the inspection of a backyard from a chopper , by a police officer , with no warrant , is reasonable or not ?? that is up to him , or up to the court . Yet , the word :reasonable , obliges , as if it is the law itself . The same concerning blockades...

...and have rendered constitutional reform -- or at least a deeper political crisis -- far more likely. A shot in the foot, really. humblelawstudent Matthias, Here is what I've learned about the Honduran Constitution. First, their Constitution specifically states that a President can never seek another term. Two, their Constitution states that the above Constitutional prohibition can only be changed by a referendum that is approved by their Congress (other parts can be changed through popular referendum but not the second term provision). Three, their Constitution has a specific provision...

...rounded up and exterminated. Cambodia- Established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, 1 million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Guatemala- Established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Uganda- Established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. Defenseless people rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control: 56 million. Henry Bowman "The craziest...

...you haven't conceded it, either). 2. Who qualifies as an "unlawful enemy combatant" that may be detained under the laws of war and thus under the AUMF? As you know, the Administration's view of this category is exceedingly capacious and indistinct. Even in your own formulation, it covers anyone who has in some indeterminate sense "supported" Al Qaeda or the Taliban or any "associated forces" of AQ and the Taliban. How broad is this category, exactly? Shouldn't it be defined in terms of persons who are actually a threat to...

...read Quirin as you do. It was not articulating a battlefield status, the term "unlawful combatants" referred to combatants whose conduct made them subject to punishment for a law of war violation. However, I wouldn't go so far as to say that the Bush era use of that term was a precursor to "membership" targeting. I am not even sure that membership in a terrorist group is sufficient for targeting in current U.S. practice, as you assert. As Kevin's comments suggest, more is typically alleged to be present then simple...

tools to match our discipline and research task. Or at least we should learn to do so. Consequently, I don't believe Grafton or the CUP editor when they blithely assert that most academic research "begins" with Google. I trust many researchers may imagine that they haven't in fact "begun" research until they've taken a stab at a search engine, but they are mistaken. I view academic research as a cumulative, collective undertaking, but I think what's being treated here as research is one rudimentary variety of it, namely, an incremental...

...a domestic law setting, and confers no legal rights on them. I don't have any expert view on the Civil War, but I agree pretty much with John's comment above. Insurgent is not a legal term; belligerent is a legal term with many meanings, some historical and some not. They are useful terms, but not as some fixed legal distinction. Marko Milanovic EricD, I am most emphatically not asking you to prove a negative, but rather to prove an affirmative assertion. The argument goes like this: (1) Classical, pre WW-II...

...Palestinian multilateral maneuvering, which is squarely within their prerogative, acting as any other self-interested political entity would. But then maybe we should dial down the discourse depicting this as an idealistically motivated move – striking a blow for international criminal justice, or placing a conflict under the umbrella of law – and come to terms with the fact that the Palestinians are practicing lawfare by any other name, even at the expense of the values supposedly guiding their march to the ICC. I wince whenever I see the term “lawfare,”...

adopted Guiding Principles for the Search for Disappeared Persons, affirms that ‘the search should be conducted under the presumption that the disappeared person is alive, regardless of the circumstances of the disappearance, the date on which the disappearance began and when the search is launched’. Principle 7 adds that the search is a continuing obligation. The fact that the relevant jurisprudence is by no means unanimous makes the communication against Spain pending before the CCPR the perfect opportunity to specify the precise legal consequences of the continuous nature of enforced...