Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...think that the text of Article 17 supports such efforts, but the efforts are there nonetheless. So one of the basic goals of my Article is to demonstrate that it may well be counterproductive to insist that states prosecute international crimes as international crimes, given their legal and evidentiary complexity. Second, although Carsten seems to concede that international crimes are more difficult to prosecute domestically than ordinary crimes, he points out that they have their advantages, such as to offer ‘”a broader basis for jurisdiction (i.e. prosecution of extraterritorial acts),...

...which would consider this as an extraterritorial enforcement of the hacker states’ power, in terms of violation of the other states’ territorial sovereignty (p. 392). A position which the UK and US, however, do not align with, as they do not consider cyber operations on another state’s territory to constitute violations of international law per se.  Further grey areas include ambiguity as to how cyber activities are to be considered under the principles of sovereignty, self-determination and states’ existing international human rights obligations, to name but a few. The value...

...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...

...NGO activities in Egypt before being allowed to leave the country. I had always thought “diplomatic asylum” something of a misnomer, as often paired with the common misunderstanding that embassy premises are extraterritorial (as in, that the US embassy in Beijing counts as US territory, which in fact it doesn’t). Turns out that the term has some historical traction, even though the its operation now appears to turn on the inviolability of diplomatic premises under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and not any distinctive legal doctrine. Much of that...

...than what is already available from non-US providers, so for years global platforms like Google Earth displayed only low-resolution imagery of the area. This is a remarkable example of the extraterritorial reach of a US legislation that with a domestic statute could effectively project one state’s security interests into the global infrastructure of witness Earth from above. This exceptional censorship regime hid evidence of expanding settlements, leveled villages, and military deployments, hindering both science and human rights monitoring for decades.​ The accountability costs were real. Through the Second Intifada and...

For the first time, a truth and reconciliation commission has picked up stakes and moved to a foreign country to take public testimony: The Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission began its first extraterritorial session in St. Paul Minnesota this week. The Star Tribune has the full story here. One remarkable aspect of the story is the size of the Liberian expat community in the twin cities, and what it says about how the international becomes local — and vice versa: Minnesota is home to about 30,000 Liberians. It is one...

...Chief Justice Roberts stated that ““[c]orporations are often present in many countries, and it would reach too far to say that mere corporate presence suffices [to displace the presumption against extraterritorial application].” The argument here is that although “mere corporate presence” is not enough, corporations with other, deeper connections might displace the presumption against extraterritoriality. (Since the Court in other places explicitly stated it was not reaching the corporate liability question, I am skeptical of this argument). Second, and more persuasively, you might argue that because the Supreme Court dismissed...

...part of Volume 35(2), the National Law School of India Review (‘NLSIR’) is releasing a Special Issue focusing on the interactions of TWAIL with ideas of jurisdiction, extraterritoriality, statehood, and sovereignty. The vision behind the Issue owes its origins to Prof. B.S. Chimni’s path-breaking article titled “The International Law of Jurisdiction: A TWAIL Perspective”. In his work, Prof. Chimni highlights the need to critically (re)view the categories of ‘territory’ and ‘extraterritorial. Prof. B.S. Chimni will provide an Afterword, with general reflections and takeaways from the Special Issue. Keeping with our...

...to address in the early stages of this draft. Looking forward A treaty that would link B&HR would provide a more coherent and less fragmented international law, stipulating that human rights would take part of the law that regulates businesses. A treaty could clarify the precise content of states’ duty to protect human rights by being explicit in the extraterritorial reach of this duty, in order to dissipate any confusion. It would define clear legal obligations of corporations with respect to human rights, and could address how multi-national corporations can...

Philip Alston has posted an important new essay on targeted killing on SSRN. Here is the abstract of the essay, which is forthcoming in the Harvard National Security Journal: This Article focuses on the accountability of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in relation to targeted killings, under both United States law and international law. As the CIA, often in conjunction with Department of Defense (DOD) Special Operations forces, becomes more and more deeply involved in carrying out extraterritorial targeted killings both through kill/capture missions and drone-based missile strikes in a...

...state torts for wrongful death, battery, and false imprisonment are the basis for causes of action for international human rights litigation, then state choice of law rules are going to become the rage for human rights practitioners. We should all start reading the conflict of laws treatises of Patrick Borchers and Symeon Symeonides again, and start considering the constitutional and international law limits of the extraterritorial application of common law torts. Fortunately, some incredibly productive young guns like Chris Whytock, Trey Childress, and Anthony Colangelo are filling the gap. My...

...a decision of the High Court of England and Wales that has already received a good bit of attention. The reason I limit the question to “in armed conflict” is that outside of armed conflict, the source of detention power is clear. There, it’s domestic law as constrained by international human rights law that provides the answer. A single important asterisk is made necessary here because a very few recalcitrant states, like the US, deny that human rights law applies to their extraterritorial conduct. The reason I limit the question...