Search: extraterritorial sanctions

[Bill Frelick is the director of Human Rights Watch’s Refugee Rights Program. See part one of his post here.] Since Sale v. Haitian Centers Council judgment in 1993 settled the issue of extraterritorial application of the principle of nonrefoulement in US domestic law, US-based refugee rights advocates after 1993 were left without recourse to US courts. But, writing for the Sale majority, Justice Stevens had said, “The wisdom of the policy choices by Presidents Reagan, Bush, and Clinton is not a matter for our consideration.” Accordingly, US advocates turned their...

...they make or domestic issues that they raise. So take all this with a grain of salt. Add any cases I missed in the comments, and we’ll turn this post into a wiki. Nonetheless, note that the most cited case US case related to international law that I found comes from the Second Circuit – U.S. v. Alcoa (extraterritorial jurisdiction) has been cited 714 times. BNC v. Sabbatino, the act of state doctrine case, came next with 501 references. Two comity cases, Hilton v. Guyot and Hartford Fire v. CA...

...precedent in Rasul v. Bush, the district court ruled that RFRA applies to Guantanomo Bay. Here is an excerpt: The defendants argue that RFRA does not apply extraterritorially, specifically, to the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay…. The defendants argue that Congress intended for RFRA to apply only to government action in the continental United States…. RFRA defines the government to include, inter alia, covered entities. 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-2(1). In turn, covered entities means “the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and each territory and possession of...

...the Quasi-War and Seminole War.” But Kent notes that simply because the Constitution does not govern extraterritorial uses of coercive force, it does not mean that the Founders considered such actions extra-legal. The law of nations constrained the U.S. government’s actions abroad. If you will recall this exchange between the Solicitor General Paul Clement and Justice Souter in the recent oral argument in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, you understand the gravity of Kent’s position. The modern application of Kent’s argument is that if the writ cannot be suspended, it does not...

In reading Kal’s description of territoriality’s ebb and flow, I was particularly interested in the evolution in judicial thinking with regard to constitutional scope or domain. His description of the path from In re Ross, which stated emphatically that the Constitution does not follow the flag, to Reid and Boumediene, which give some extra-territorial force to the Bill of Rights and other constitutional guarantees, is excellent. The evolution has obviously been gradual, even glacial. Within this narrative, there are some fascinating examples of courts dramatically pushing constitutional boundaries outward, including...

...proposition that the Rome Statute obligates state parties to enact universal jurisdiction for ICC crimes Step 2: the decision to code a state as having enacted universal jurisdiction if it (a) is a party to the Rome Statute and (b) its domestic law provides for jurisdiction over crimes obligated by international treaty As I explained in my original post, Step 1 is flawed. The Rome Statute does not include universal jurisdiction, and has no obligation whatsoever for state parties to provide (extraterritorial) jurisdiction for ICC crimes. I suspect that the...

...(UNIIIC). Saturday 10 November is just as rich and exciting, with 11 panels covering issues as varied as conflict resolution and justice, international arbitration, multinational enterprises, health care in war zones, the rules governing financial crises, development and humanitarian assistance and extraterritorial jurisdiction. Saturday also presents a stimulating plenary panel on the Security Council with David Malone and Rohan Mukherjee from Princeton University The full program and details for registration are available here. The Conference Co-chairs are Fannie Lafontaine (Laval University) and Rodney Neufeld (DFAIT). CCIL Vice-president (Annual Conference) is...

...to international crimes experienced by the Rohingya – this formal complaint puts the assertion to the test. So far, the complete lack of response to Setara’s complaint confirms that justice for the Rohingya is not possible. In other parts of the world, initiatives utilising universal and extraterritorial jurisdiction are also underway, in which Rohingya women and in particular, survivors of sexual violence play a critical role. In November 2021, a court in Argentina decided to open investigations into crimes committed in Myanmar, under the principle of universal jurisdiction. Prior to...

...as originally understood, article 51 did not permit extraterritorial force against non-state actors without the consent of the territorial State. The real question, therefore, is whether state practice, whether as a constituent element of customary international law, or as subsequent practice for the purposes of interpreting the UN Charter, could have modified this original state-centric reading of the Charter. This question is at the heart of a forthcoming book, The Trialogue on the Use of Force against Non-State Actors (Mary Ellen O’Connell, Christian Tams, Dire Tladi). In my view, an...

Douglas Burgess, Jr., has an editorial in today’s New York Times arguing that piracy should be considered terrorism in order to facilitate its prosecution. It’s an interesting piece, but I have to take issue with the basic premise of his argument: Are pirates a species of terrorist? In short, yes. The same definition of pirates as hostis humani generis could also be applied to international organized terrorism. Both crimes involve bands of brigands that divorce themselves from their nation-states and form extraterritorial enclaves; both aim at civilians; both involve acts...

...VI. TREATY CLAUSES Initial Decisions on Treaty-Making Distinguishing Political Commitments from Treaties Object and Purpose Participation Conditions for States Participation Conditions for Non-State Actors NGO Involvement Conditions on Joining a Treaty Consent to be Bound Reservations Declarations and Notifications Constituting the Treaty and its Dissemination Languages Annexes Entry into Force The Depositary Applying the Treaty Provisional Application Territorial and Extraterritorial Application Federal States Relationships to Other Treaties Derogations Dispute Settlement Amendments Standard Amendment Procedures Simplified Amendment Procedures The End of Treaty Relations Withdrawal or Denunciation Suspension Duration and Termination Index...

...right to use force in self-defense more easily. First, the nature of the potential attacker: Although state practice in the aftermath of international armed conflict suggests no change from the traditional conception of armed attack when two states are involved, consider how the aftermath of an extraterritorial conflict against a non-state group, particularly a terrorist group, might contribute to driving down the threshold for an armed attack. After the state has suffered an armed attack and used force in self-defense against the non-state group already, leading to the armed conflict...