In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: jens iverson

07 Feb

This week on Opinio Juris, Kevin argued that the CIA and Mossad violated the Terrorist Bombing Convention in the 2008 bombing of Imad Mughniyah, Hezbollah’s international operations chief. Kevin also responded to Ryan Goodman’s Just Security post on Serdar Mohammed. A second part of that response is still to come, but Kevin already flagged the ICRC’s November 2014 Opinion Paper on detention in NIAC. Kevin also recommended Jens’ new book, and for the month of February OUP is offering a discount to our readers, so be quick to grab your...
07.02.15 | |

26 Nov

[Jennifer Trahan is an Associate Clinical Professor at the Center for Global Affairs at New York University.] As Jens Ohlin has written, a highly awaited verdict came out Wednesday, November 22, sentencing Ratko Mladic, former commander of the Main Staff of the Bosnian Serb Army (VRS), to life in prison for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed from 1992-1995. The verdict was not unexpected given Mladić’s lengthy trial, and that his involvement as commander of the troops who committed the Srebrenica massacre was recorded on well–known news footage....
26.11.17 | |

31 May

Over the last two weeks at Opinio Juris, we’ve seen several contributions. Our regular bloggers covered a number of recent developments such as Deborah’s recent post, cross-posted on Just Security, on the D.C. district court’s considering the habeas petition of Guantanamo detainee Mukhtar Yahia Naji al Warafi, and the concept of “active hostilities.” On a related note, Jens covered the nature and scope of the conflict in Afghanistan. Kristen pointed out that the ILC has now appointed a special rapporteur on jus cogens and also highlighted two recent reports on...
31.05.15 | |

17 Feb

...soldiers but also kills civilians is not 'terrorism' if it is used discriminately, proportionaly and under military necessity - yet civilians still die. Shouldn't the same calculus be applied to suicide-bombers? That is, if their action is directed against combatants, used discriminately, proportionaly and under military necessity, and civilian death are only incidental, then neither should suicide bombers be terrorists. Unless the significant difference is suicide? But that seems to make neither practical nor legal sense... Eric Iverson It seems to me that what is missing in this conversation is...
17.02.06 | |

16 Jul

Kari We're looking forward to having you!!! Kevin Jon Heller Thanks, Kari! Patrick S. O'Donnell Wonderful news. Hearty congratulations Kevin! Kenneth Anderson Kevin, congratulations - what a well deserved honor! Very best to you and your family in the move. Benjamin Davis London calling! - http://youtu.be/4vHvzybkqfo Best, Ben Jens Ohlin Congratulations. Wonderful news....
16.07.13 | |

07 Nov

Jens David Ohlin Thanks for this very interesting post. Although it is impossible to gleam much information from a TV show, there are two ways of interpreting the idea of conspiring to aid and abet. The first is to interpret the conspiracy element as a substantive offense, in which case the prosecutor would be trying to make an inchoate crime out of aiding and abetting terrorism. The second is to interpret conspiracy as a mode of liability, in which case the prosecutor is trying to join two modes of liability...
07.11.11 | |

03 May

...of the power to detain with the power to target. Anyone who can be targeted can be detained, but not everyone who can be detained can be targeted. Miles Outstanding post. Surgically incisive. Jens David Ohlin Has the US ever stated that it targets individuals who do not meet the CCF standard? Might v. Right While we're at it, let's not neglect to fully and clearly specify the lawful source(s) of authority for the 'protective' military detention of persons by State parties during "armed conflict." If prisoners held by a...
03.05.12 | |

01 Aug

...which non-state actors have become parties to a given NIAC, just as is done in IAC. It merely takes a slightly different legal path. Whether a non-state actor is a party to an armed conflict is generally a function of its attaining a sufficient level of organization. "Organization" can be formal or functional. And functional organization can include conduct-based linking of what might, at least in name, be disparate "organizations." (See Jens Ohlin's excellent chapter, "Targeting Co-Belligerents.") Thus, coordinated activity in the application of violence provides sufficent organization to treat...
01.08.12 | |

13 Apr

...is from their own wrongdoing. It's as if I killed someone, then ran to Britain and argued if they sent me back to the US I might get the death penalty. Tobias Thienel jvarisco, You would certainly gain protection from the death penalty that way. That's pretty much what Jens Soering, of Soering v. United Kingdom 'fame', had done. da23will, I don't see how there could be 'jurisdiction', but Soering would not apply. There is only one concept of 'jurisdiction', which if present triggers all obligations under the Convention. There...
13.04.08 | |

19 Aug

...they are investigating or prosecuting. But that seems like a stretch, so I think an amendment would be the better course. Jens David Ohlin This seems to me to be, at some level, a debate about formalism and functionalism. The function of the procedure is to allow a challenge stemming from a domestic prosecution -- on that level who cares whether the domestic entity fulfills the Montevideo (or some other) criteria? Well, the status of that entity matters if you care about its formal status, i suppose. I think it...
19.08.12 | |