In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: extraterritorial sanctions

18 Oct

Jordan The Justices better be careful what they state about the 5th Amend.! Jurisdiction over criminal accused has been extraterritorial and based in customary international law, especially with respect to universal jurisdiction and protective jurisdiciton, e.g., seizure of persons on foreign flag vessels accused of international drug trafficking even where there is no proof that they intended to import into the U.S., Mr. al-Libi, etc. Several lower courts have used international law regarding jurisdicvtion to inform the meaning of what process is "due" under the 5th Amend. -- and the...
18.10.13 | |

05 Nov

...to situations affected or potentially affected by the ICJ decision. It is further worth observing that the Constitutional Court while reaching the conclusion that article 2 and 24 of the Constitution prevail over the rule of international law granting sovereign States immunity for acta jure imperii, made it clear that its reasoning was referred to war crimes and crimes committed on Italian soil (Paras 4.1 and 5 of the decision). This said, what relevance can we expect the decision of the Italian Constitutional Court will have for extraterritorial claims? What...
05.11.14 | |

10 Nov

...(generally more restrictive) HR (and other applicable peacetime norms), not ILOAC standards. Whether such actions may be carried out extraterritorialy, i.e. in the territory of another state, is a question of jus ad bellum, not ILOAC, as Marko likewise rightly noted and the two regimes on the use of armed force should not be conflated. The ILOAC may or may not apply regardless of the jus ad bellum questions. I think that in terms of jus ad bellum, the US president would have a harder task than just coming up...
10.11.08 | |

08 Jun

...Israel's considers) there is no occupation there is simply no law to apply (reference to general principles of law will not get someone very far, whereas Israel -- along with other States -- does not recognise extraterritorial application of its ICCPR obligations in accordance with that instruments basic text). In any event, the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention that Israel does apply are its humanitarian provisions (see Ajuri and Others v. Israel Defence Force Commander, 125 I.L.R. 537, 547, ¶ 13 (Israel H.Ct.J. 2002)). shmuel Ori, "if (as Israel’s...
08.06.14 | |

20 Apr

...section 1605A has an extraterritorial scope; it is not limited to claims related to acts of terrorism within the United States. Even before the terrorism exception was first adopted in 1996, a US federal court had interpreted a different section of FSIA (section 1605(a)(5)) to find that Chile was not entitled to immunity in connection with a political assassination – an act of terrorism – on US territory (Letelier v. Republic of Chile, 488 F. Supp. 665 (D.D.C. 1980)). The key difference between the existing regime and the proposed amendment...
20.04.16 | |

13 Jun

Francisco F. Martin I haven't read the Boumediene decision or the Halliday and White article (and, therefore, do not know if they mentioned any admiralty cases), but aliens captured extraterritorially (whether on the high seas or in foreign territory) were and are entitled to habeas relief by federal courts sitting in admiralty by virtue of the savings to suitors clause of the 28 U.S.C. sec. 1333 (first enacted in the Judiciary Act of 1789). I do know that some of the Gitmo detainees were transported by ship and/or captured by...
13.06.08 | |

05 Dec

...three part functional test for the extraterritorial availability of the Great Writ: "at least three factors are relevant in determining the reach of the Suspension Clause: (1) the citizenship and status of the detainee and the adequacy of the process through which that status determination was made; (2) the nature of the sites where apprehension and then detention took place; and (3) the practical obstacles inherent in resolving the prisoner’s entitlement to the writ." The Court has not emphasized citizenship too heavily in its decisions regading the general availability of...
05.12.12 | |

30 Mar

...offences’ are defined as inter alia extraterritorial offences “which [constitute] an offence under the law of another state [presumably the territorial state] and which would have constituted [terrorism] … had that activity taken place in the Republic”. To my mind, at least, that conditions SA’s UJ in Okah to offences that were also offences under the law of Nigeria (loosely ‘double criminality’). There is another contender for UJ however (section 15(2)), which states in relevant part that any act [NOTE: not ‘specified offence’] committed outside the Republic shall, regardless of...
30.03.14 | |

23 Jan

...obligations under the United Nations Charter, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention Against Torture. The article also provides an Appendix that sets forth a Torture Timeline 2001 – 2007 and addresses standards for criminal complicity that would be applicable concerning criminal or civil sanctions against members of the prior Administration who are clearly reasonably accused. [forthcoming, 18 Barry L. Rev. (2013)] The Bush-Cheney Legacy: Serial Torture and Forced Disappearance in Manifest Violation of Global Human Rights Law – Jordan J. Paust Introduction I. Rejection of...
23.01.12 | |

13 Jun

...does not reflect international law despite the assertion that it does], which expressly does not apply to section 404, etc., etc. -- and Moxon and Bolchos had extraterritorial aspects that the majority opinion ignores -- such as the fact that foreign flag vessesls are the equivalent of foreign territory wherever the happen to end up and the fact that a violation of international law can take place elsewhere in some cases but the vessel ends up in a U.S. port). Despite the shocking 9-0 ultimate vote, errors must be addressed...
13.06.13 | |

05 Aug

...belligerents, and thus are subject to domestic criminal charges for their mere participation in the conflict (though APII art. 6(5) encourages amnesty). But such participation is not an international crime. For an unprivileged belligerent to kill a U.S. soldier in combat in Afghanistan falls within U.S. extraterritorial jurisdiction, and presumably constituted a domestic-law crime in 2001-02, so it can be tried in a regular U.S. court. Neither can be said, so far as I can see, for otherwise-lawful acts of war committed by unprivileged belligerents against our "co-belligerents." Howard Gilbert...
05.08.08 | |

17 Feb

...read the text in favor of people who will have state power applied against them. (Consider the Geneva Conventions.) Also, there is I believe a strong plain language presumption with treaties, and I don't thinking banning this kind of arrangement would be an absurd result that rebuts this presumption. Obviously such arrangements have not been thought integral/essential to piracy prosecution, as they have never been used since 2006. Finally, an easy way around the rule is the procedure used for the Lockerbie bombing trial: extraterritoriality. Edward Swaine Eugene, thanks for...
17.02.09 | |