Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...pressuring governments and corporations to cease military collaborations. Advocate for Trade Sanctions: Advocate for trade sanctions against Israel and all businesses that support Israel’s occupation. Pressure governments to implement these sanctions and target companies complicit in violating Palestinian rights. Suspend Israel from International Events: Campaign for the suspension of Israel from international sports and cultural events. Encourage cultural institutions and workers to boycott collaborations with Israeli entities to undermine the normalisation of apartheid. Boycott Israeli Academic Institutions: Advocate for a comprehensive boycott of Israeli academic institutions. Support Palestinian educators and students...

...arrival of Ansar Dine/AQIM in Timbuktu; it was, Judge Mindua states, therefore allowed (Separate Opinion [58]). Amputation and flogging were, however, more problematic. They had not really applied in Mali [56] and, as Judge Mindua acknowledges, they appear as torture to many international lawyers [64]. Nevertheless, Judge Mindua points out, they are legal sanctions in states which belong to the United Nations.  As such, Judge Mindua will not state that these sanctions are necessarily illegal, even though he notes their incongruency with human rights and international law. He remains equivocal...

Jordan John: interesting, but I do not agree that he has immunity from a criminal sanctions process that involves custody, transfer, and prosecution before the ICC, especially since there is absolutely no immunity under any international criminal treaty for a head of state (e.g., Genocide Convention, art. IV; Geneva Conventions; CAT, arts. 1, 5-7 -- and the customary international law reflected in each) and Article 27(1)-(2) (which mirrors customary international law with respect to sanctions processes of international criminal tribunals) expressly denies immunity with respect to the ICC sanctions process....

...the problem of WMD proliferation can be appropriately addressed by targeted “emergency” sanctions based on IEEPA authorities, how best to “multilateralize” these targeted sanctions, and whether the U.S. asset blocking program under E.O. 13382 raises Due Process concerns. Rather than attempt a critique, I’d simply like to highlight some aspects of these topics that I think could benefit from further thought. Professor Guymon concludes her post by noting that the executive’s ”judicious use” of E.O. 13382 adequately addresses any concern that an IEEPA national emergency might continue indefinitely. I would...

...territorial sea.  The UK seized the vessel because it was believed to be transporting Iranian oil to Syria in breach of sanctions responding to international crimes. While this act violated the ship’s (or Panama’s) passage rights under the law of the sea, the law governing countermeasures arguably offered avenues for precluding its wrongfulness. In casu, the British action must be seen within the broader context of Western sanctions then aimed at dissuading the Assad regime from persisting in international crimes and other human rights violations.  But this argumentative option is...

...Clinton is calling on the UNSC for tougher sanctions against Syria, even though such sanctions are expected to be vetoed. The EU Parliament has approved a deal with the US on air passenger data sharing that includes tighter restrictions to ensure privacy. EU foreign ministers are set to suspend sanctions against Myanmar for one year. Colombia’s FARC denies any plans to surrender, despite proposing negotiations with government. Tensions further escalate between Sudan and South Sudan as the current Sudanese president Omar Hassan al-Bashir has promised to teach its neighbor to...

...banking and real estate transactions that are intended to launder illicit funds. This necessarily requires targeted use of legal and policy tools to prevent violators of IHL and their associates from profiteering from serious breaches of IHL. Some of the examples of targeted sanctions identified in Dr Mutuma’s chapter include punitive bilateral trade and investment measures against the government of South Sudan, banning the acquisition of property in Kenya and Uganda by individuals on the UN sanctions list for war crimes, as well as confiscation of the property of such...

...Oil for Food scandal for the institution’s long-term survival. Petty corruption is one thing, but petty corruption that directly undermines the U.N.’s administration of sanctions against Iraq is quite another. If the U.N. cannot effectively administer sanctions against Iraq without succumbing to rather easy and blatant corruption by an unsavory figure like Saddam Hussein, it is hard to see why the “international community” should “trust” the U.N. to deal effectively with other serious threats to international peace and security. It is also hard to see why, for instance, the U.N.’s...

...be a UN-mandated force under OSCE guidance, or a force with a delegated UN mandate supervised by the Group of Supporting States. Should any side resume the conflict, an arrangement for the automatic snap-back of sanctions could be constructed. While this might be difficult to accept for the Russian Federation, Ukraine and its allies could insist that the UN Security Council Resolution that would endorse the settlement under Chapter VII provides for sanctions that would be brought into force automatically, and universally, should a further armed attack occur. As confirmed...

...State responsibility norms to cover an extensive range of accountability mechanisms at the international and domestic level. International Criminal Justice may potentially benefit from the conceptualisation of a duty to end impunity lying with the States and associated with appropriate consequences for the failure to fulfil this duty. It is important to note that this obligation may not only fall upon the States. The Security Council may also have an impact on ending impunity through targeted sanctions and other accountability measures. Due to the limited length of this post, this...

The Brits are looking to strip Asma al-Assad of her UK citizenship, this in the wake of the imposition of various sanctions on her and family members of other Assad associates. Familial sanctions are an increasingly common practice, on the theory that you really get at the bad guys when you deprive their spouses of shopping trips to world capitals. (In Mrs. Assad’s case, the theory seems pretty plausible, in light of the recent email cache revealing her attention to trivial luxury purchases while Homs burned.) But so long as...

...in his seminal War, Aggression and Self-Defence, at least in the context of international armed conflict. So here are my questions: [1] Does anyone know where the US might have defended/explained its position at more length, whether in a legal brief or elsewhere? [2] Does anyone know of scholars other than Dinstein who take the position that once a state acts in self-defence, none of its (extraterritorial) acts in the resulting armed conflict are subject to the jus ad bellum? Any suggestions or citations from readers would be most appreciated....