Search: extraterritorial sanctions
12 Feb Legal Uncertainty Regarding the Applicability of the ECHR in International Armed Conflict in the Active Phase of the Hostilities
...conflict—at least for now. No Responsibility of Russia during the Phase of Active Hostilities The Court found Russia responsible for human rights abuses (Articles 2, 3, 5, 8; Article 1 P1 and Article 2 P4) only in the immediate aftermath of the conflict, but not during the phase of active hostilities. In this regard, the argumentation of the Court and the dissenting opinions reveal that it was not easy for the Court to legally resolve the issue related to the extraterritorial applicability of the ECHR in the active phase of...28 May A Question for Ken
...Pakistan, and it violates the right to life of the person killed. It is the wrongfulness of the former only that can be precluded by an invocation of self-defense, just like Pakistan’s (or Yemen’s, or whoever’s) consent would preclude it. But, assuming the (extraterritorial) application of human rights treaties to a given situation, I don’t see how self-defense could be used to preclude the wrongfulness of an act contrary to the individual rights enshrined in such treaties. It is indisputable, for example, that self-defense as a matter of the jus...17 Sep Extra Thoughts on Today’s 2nd Circuit ATS Decision
...which the court reserved on ways in which it might be curtailed still further – in passing, the court noted but declined to take a view on whether the ATS might have no extraterritorial application, limiting it to conduct within the United States. Once corporations were understood as targets, once everyone understood that neither plaintiff nor defendant required any traditional connection to the United States, as parties, in conduct, nothing, and once the plaintiffs bar saw opportunities to join forces with the NGOs and activists, the trend of the ATS...19 Oct Legally Distinct Corporate Entities and Agency Theory in Bauman v. Daimler AG and Kiobel
...is proper for a US court to find jurisdiction over a foreign corporate entity on the basis of of a US corporate subsidiary. Chief Justice Roberts flagged the importance of this further question at the very end of his Kiobel opinion, which relied upon the presumption against extraterritoriality; for something to “touch and concern” the United States, he said, sufficient to satisfy jurisdictional requirements under the ATS, contacts would have to be more than mere corporate presence. Corporations are often present in many countries, and it would reach too far...24 Jan A Response to Kevin Jon Heller by Carsten Stahn
...offer a broader basis for jurisdiction (i.e. prosecution of extraterritorial acts), curtail the applicability of statutes of limitation or extend the prospects for cooperation and judicial assistance. Moreover, in practice, domestic and international crime labels are de facto often interrelated in a domestic setting. Many jurisdictions rely on a mix of ‘international’ and ‘ordinary crime’ definitions in order to try offences, or adjust modes of liability to capture the conduct in question. These factors are not taken into account in the Heller’s ‘cost-benefit’ analysis. Paradoxically, in existing practice, ‘ordinary crime’...