In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: extraterritorial sanctions

18 Jun

...read in this context. What context is that? A circumstance in which there may not yet be an armed conflict (admittedly, a circumstance that has receded in Iraq substantially over the past week), and yet the relevant states - both the consenting state and the state using force - deny the applicability/existence of international human rights law. In my hypothetical above, China would deny that law's binding effect. In Iraq, the US carries with it its longstanding view that, e.g., the ICCPR, has no extraterritorial effect on U.S. actions. If...
18.06.14 | |

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 | |

04 Oct

...So, you rightly ask, what work is the LOAC doing? Why not just apply IHRL directly to the specific factual circumstances surrounding each deprivation of life? Here are a few thoughts: First, the LOAC may apply where IHRL does not. As you know, there is a move to apply IHRL to all extraterritorial killings by state agents, but if that move fails then the LOAC may be the only applicable law in many cases. Second, where both apply, the LOAC provides a floor of protection, a minimal content to “arbitrary”...
04.10.16 | |

22 Aug

...by non-state actors BEFORE the organization, intensity and duration criteria are met. That, to me, seems to be most dynamic area of IHL going forward (and the largest issue surrounding the Tallinn Manual). U.S. policy statements endorse the view that IHL governs acts of national self-defense against extraterritorial non-state actors who pose an "imminent" and "continuing" threat. Others claim human rights law governs even though the U.S. claims it doesn't apply extraterritorially. How that difference of opinion is ultimately resolved has tremendous practical consequences for states and non-state actors alike....
22.08.14 | |

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 | |

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 | |

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 | |

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 | |

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 | |

04 Jan

...And in response to Benjamin G. Davis, who seems to think that somehow US extraterritorial taxation is fair because of the exclusions: frankly, you have no idea what you are talking about. The problem is that most people in the rest of the world pay a lot of VAT/or GST/HST--the United States doesn't have a national sales tax. Most of Europe and Canada does. Furthermore the earned income exclusion doesn't count against investment income--including many registered accounts in Canada (RESP, RDSP, TFSA). Finally, you cannot count taxes paid under the...
04.01.12 | |

13 Mar

...states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects." Const. Art. III § 2. Nom Err, Ben. I understand you speak in jest, but citizenship is an idependent basis for extraterritorial jurisdiction, so your citizenship makes clear you can be reached by US law even when overseas. The question is whether it applies to non-citizens when they are not within US territory. See US v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990)(Fourth Amendment does not apply to US agents breaking into a Mexican's home in Mexico)....
13.03.08 | |