Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...the clergy, seemingly relying on the Holy See’s supreme power in the Church and the duty of obedience of the members of religious orders. We suggest that the Committee’s approach could be strengthened by a reflection on the role of the HS’s as the supreme power and its consequences for the scope of its obligations under the CRC; a better explanation of the ducal nature of the CRC ratification; and engaging with the broader question of extraterritorial jurisdiction in international human rights law. The Holy See, Supreme Power in the...

...Guantanamo are serving any of these purposes. To the extent they may be justified in this context at all, it is as the only forum in which it is possible to charge violations of the law of war – either because there is no relevant charging offense under federal criminal law, or because federal criminal law did not at the time extend to cover extraterritorial offenses. I suppose other justifications might be offered, and I’d be happy to have them. But I doubt the we-can’t-win-under-the-evidentiary-standards-in-Article-III-court rationale is one of them....

...of the actor, the nature of the recipient(s), and the nature of the information. If the intent to harm a nation's security interests is present, I have trouble accepting an argument that potential criminal culpability should stop with the first non-citizen or non-government employee who receives (rather than extracts) and then further discloses a government's secrets. Of course, the biggest obstacle to prosecuting a violation of an extraterritorially applied domestic law is the lack of legitimate extraterritorial enforcement power. Merely having an applicable law on the books does not automatically...

...their domestic rule of law, state authorities must ensure that their domestic law does not give legal effect to the basis for business activities in Israeli settlements. All business activities carried out under Israel’s illegal regime by the corporate nationals of law-abiding states would entail concrete legal risks under the company’s home-state law, insofar as those activities oblige the state to give legal effect to Israel’s internationally unlawful acts as though they were lawful. 3) The report’s recommendations to states fall short of adequately addressing foreign corporate involvement in extraterritorial...

...similar jurisprudence on the basis that the European Convention has a different scope of application provision than does the ICCPR. This is a reference to the old saw, also dismissed by the HR Committee, that the ICCPR has no extraterritorial application. But note that even if that were true, it would not be cause to deny complementarity between IHRL and IHL; it would only be cause to deny that a State has IHRL obligations when it, say, tortures people in wars on foreign lands, a position that, by the way,...

...of any prescription drug without a valid prescription was prohibited in baseball, and even earlier under federal law. In 1971, baseball’s drug policy required compliance with federal, state, and local drug laws and directed baseball’s athletic trainers that anabolic steroids should only be provided to players under a physician’s guidance. Problem is, under traditional rules of extraterritoriality, the federal regulation of the use of performance enhancing substances does not obviously apply when such use occurs in other countries. And various sections of the Mitchell Report detail allegations of “illegal” use...

The Guardian published an editorial by a Republican political operative today blaming WikiLeaks for releasing a State Department cable concerning a meeting between Tsvangirai and Susan Rice in which Tsvangirai discussed the possibility of peacefully removing Mugabe from power: Now, in the wake of the WikiLeaks’ release, one of the men targeted by US and EU travel and asset freezes, Mugabe’s appointed attorney general, has launched a probe to investigate Tsvangirai’s involvement in sustained western sanctions. If found guilty, Tsvangirai will face the death penalty. And so, where Mugabe’s strong-arming,...

...Where the tension does come to a head, the government is faced with the obligation to either give up on its secrecy interests or else face sanctions (including the dismissal of charges). This is the prospect that we have to be worried about insofar as we push more of the burden of terrorism detention into the criminal justice system. It may be that the problem won’t actually arise often, or even at all. Or it may prove a huge obstacle in some cases. I don’t think any of us are...

...for Constitutional law. One can also consider an associated dilemma as follows: giving effect to national law may have extraterritorial effects, but failing to give effect to national law may be viewed as giving extraterritorial effect to another law. The list of resolutions approved by the ASIL membership is an example of the complex interplay, and the corresponding tensions created, between national and international law. When is it proper and appropriate to suggest (at least implicitly) that norms of international law can be viewed as a constraining force on national...

...prevent the application of IHL no matter how much damage it inflicts.) In recent commentary (e.g. our PENNumbra debate and here), it seems Kevin would allow attacks beyond active conflict zones, but only if the targets' activities give them targetable status in IHL and are directly related to the hostilities occurring in an active conflict zone. Mary Ellen would not permit that position, but recently stated that she would permit an intrusion upon a foreign state's territorial integrity to engage in extraterritorial law enforcement, the intrusion necessary to do so...

...such an exception is relatively clear and constitutional, as happened in Hamdi. The exception need not comply with common law understandings of public authority. Let us hypothetically say that the CIA was used in the initial stages of the invasion of Afghanistan and worked side by side with special forces. Under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, they would likely be subject to prosecution for any conduct that violates a federal felony statute applicable in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., which includes murder. Let us further say...

...states". Indeed, if the Court wanted to be clear that a legal element was not required, it could have found a simpler example, could it not? On another issue, what do you make of the reference in para 74 to Myanmar's obligation to exercise universal jurisdiction or extraterritorial jurisdiction over certain crimes? One could go wild and argue that it implies that UJ or extraterritorial jurisdiction themselves create some inter-state element that satisfies the territorial element. This would be crazy, but how else is Myanmar's jurisdiction relevant to the issue?...