Search: extraterritorial sanctions

...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...

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...

...of his choice. While sloppy thinking may be endemic to the debate, one hopes the judge will sort things out. "Terrorists" have no more or fewer rights than bank robbers, but a non-citizen captured and held overseas and then tried for some sort of extraterritorial murder is not entitled to certain procedural rules (with regard to things that happened in foreign countries) that would apply to a resident accused of a murder in the US. One may believe that civilian courts would be more likely than military courts to make...

...the substance of what is being punished to make an accurate evaluation. I am not sure how helpful it is to level broadside attacks based solely on labels. Additionally, I would encourage you to consider my recent Journal of International Criminal Justice article regarding the municipal, common law basis of some offenses in the MCA...and the next one in that Journal (if accepted, currently pending) regarding the propriety of their application to conduct in an extraterritorial armed conflict - particularly given the legality principle (for those unfamiliar, similar to ex...

...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...

...the British Right, and particularly on the more 'conservative' newspapers - and, of course, on the yellow press of whatever persuasion. The Conservatives have even vowed to repeal the Human Rights Act if elected. Not that they seem to have the faintest idea what the Act does, mind you... da23will There's certainly a strong policy argument against extending the extraterritorial application of HR treaties too far if it means that states are going to refrain from arresting pirates on the high seas, for fear that they'll be unable to return...

...(if, in my view, unfortunate) position that ICCPR doesn’t apply extraterritorially (which the report acknowledges), this seems a bit of a tough legal case to make. Beyond the trial situation (to which it seems CA3 would surely apply), as long as we’re choosing between legal regimes the United States officially rejects, why not pick APII, or API by analogy, as the more useful standard? Truly asking here. Finally (for now, I’m still catching up), former State Department Legal Adviser John Bellinger and his former State Department colleague (and soon-to-be Vanderbilt...

...the plaintiffs to re-file their complaints against the US defendants to overcome the new Kiobel extraterritoriality presumption. This means that she is willing to explore in greater detail the Kiobel requirement that plaintiffs’ claims “touch and concern” the territory of the U.S. with sufficient force to displace the presumption against extraterritoriality. Will knowledge by the US parent of the subsidiaries’ activities in South Africa be enough? Will receiving profits from the subsidiaries be enough? I assume that is the best the plaintiffs will be able to plead is knowledge by...

...believe international law does not constrain covert operations, at least from the perspective of U.S. domestic law. First, we must remember that Title 50 operations may be authorized as an integral part of an armed conflict or in the absence of one. Thus, IHL may or may not be triggered and apply to a covert operation or program, and IHRL would apply only to the extent one accepts (contrary to long held official U.S. views) that IHRL applies to a nation's extraterritorial actions. Regardless of whether either body of international...

...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...

...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...