In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: self-defense

07 Feb

...to self-determination. However, the OTP does not mention the institutional branch of the Israeli occupation which has prevented Palestinians from exercising fundamental implications of their right to self-determination, i.e. the Israeli military law enforcement system established in 1967. This system appears to present ineludible profiles of relevance for the ICC’s assessment of the situation in Palestine, included the likely large-scale perpetration of specific international crimes which the OTP request, unconvincingly, only considers as potentially committed by Palestinian armed groups. The ‘Draconian’ Law of the Military Courts The Military Courts’ system...
07.02.20 | |

22 Oct

the Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Israel  invoked the right to self-defence under the UN Charter and the provisions of UNSC Resolutions 1368 (2001) and 1373 (2001) issued in response to the attack on 9/11 in order to argue it had a right to defend itself against terrorist attacks waged by non-state actors. A quick reading of these resolutions will show, however, that they have not established new norms that extend...
22.10.24 | |

17 Nov

...indication of congressional intent to permit state law to preempt implemented, non-self-executing treaty provisions but not to preempt self-executing treaty provisions…. Because here the Convention, an implemented treaty, rather than the Convention Act, supersedes state law, the McCarran-Ferguson Act’s provision that “no Act of Congress” shall be construed to supersede state law regulating the business of insurance is inapplicable…. We find no indication from the text of the McCarran-Ferguson Act that Congress intended to signal a distinction between self-executing and non-self-executing-but-implemented treaties in the McCarran-Ferguson’s reverse-preemption clause. In other words,...
17.11.09 | |

09 Oct

...that Palestinians remain passive victims—recipients of international humanitarian aid and obedient to donor requirements to continue benefiting from UNRWA’s assistance. In exchange for food, they were expected to surrender any political agency for their liberation from colonisation. The “humanitarian administration” was designed as part of the benevolent colonial legal framework that prevented Palestinian self-determination. As Palestinians often say, “the UN gave Palestine to Israel and UNRWA to Palestinians”. Nevertheless, UNRWA has transformed from this original design into a platform where Palestinians can assert some political agency for return and self-determination,...
09.10.24 | and |

27 Feb

Secretary of Defense Mattis, albeit for other possible reasons that have not been made public. The brick that broke the kangaroo’s back seems to defense counsels’ belief that their private and privileged communications with clients were in fact being monitored by the government. Air Force Colonel Vance Spath, the man in robes* sitting behind the bench at the Guantanamo military commission’s U.S.S. Cole bombing case is at wit’s end: “I’m not ordering the Third Reich to engage in genocide. This isn’t My Lai.’ All he was doing was telling the...
27.02.18 | |

20 Jan

...the proposition as regards the law of self-defence. Action taken in self-defemce must certainly be proportionate; tis means that the measures taken to defend oneself against an armed attack must not be out of proportion to the end of repelling the attack. (Note: this does not mean that the victim State can only use as many forces in its defence as the aggressor has used in the attack; it means that the sum total of the uses of force employed in self-defence must not be excessive, so that it is...
20.01.07 | |

06 Sep

...War Powers Resolution" and that "Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution." But notice what the War Powers Resolution applies to (and only to) -- “the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities." Jordan There is insufficient attention here to the alternative self-defense paradigm. Covert action targeting persons in a manner that is lawful under the international law of self-defense (e.g., against a person who is DPAA, directly participating in armed attacks) is lawful whether or not it is permissible under Ttile 50, since...
06.09.14 | |

23 May

Jordan (1) The preambular portion of the AUMF states: "Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States." What constitutionally-based authority is such in case of armed attacks on the United States, its embassies abroad, its military abroad, and/or other U.S. nationals abroad? Importantly, the same preambular portion expressly recognizes a U.S. right to use military force in "self-defense." The President's constitutionally-based authority to engaged in self-defense under customary and treaty-based international law. See, e.g., Constitutionality...
23.05.14 | |

20 Jan

...engage in "regional action" (in my opinion, such as NATO action in Kosovo) while the Security Countil is veto-deadlocked. Some prefer that "anticipatory" self-defense be permitted when an armed attack has not occured yet but the attack is "imminent." Hardly anyone argues that "preemptive" self-defense should be permissible way before an actual armed attack is "imminent." And the problem with anticipatory self-defense is that it does not fit within the actual text of Article 51 of the U.N. Charter. For some of these reasons, when Israel took out a nuclear...
20.01.12 | |

06 Apr

...to statehood -- particularly in the context of a people who, like the Palestinians, have a right to self-determination. el roam Kevin , Thanks for the comment . You may think and believe of course, that the Palestinians have the right to self determination, but this is rather a subjective criteria (not to be knocked down by itself of course). What I have been raising, are objective criteria, standing on their own ground, notwithstanding the subjective perception of no one involved or not. Look good at the map, try to...
06.04.15 | |

04 May

since been able to adopt procedures to better monitor the detainees and better facilitate attorney visits. Therefore, we would have no objection to the court ordering more than the number of visits that were suggested back in August. Get that? The mass suicide attempt and successful suicides were caused by defense attorneys providing internees with information about the outside world, not by the brutal and dehumanizing conditions at Gitmo. So now that new rules have been enacted to keep the internees in line, unrestricted defense attorney visits are permissible again....
04.05.07 | |

03 Sep

...not be reconciled easily, if at all, with the more restrictive view. But even in the face of that inconsistent practice, probably a majority of scholars and UN members continued right through the Cold War to insist that the only legal uses of force unauthorized by the Security Council were cases of self-defense against actual or imminent armed attack. In recent years, however, the Charter conceived as above all a formally hegemonic system of restraint on the use of military power to advance self-defined national interests has been buffeted from...
03.09.08 | |