In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: self-defense

29 Oct

...common language and culture; or, a group which distinguishes itself, as such (self identification); or, a group identified as such by others, including perpetrators of the crimes (identification by others)”. The Mountain Men pride themselves to be the stewards of Western ‘civilisation’ and high culture. This self-image of sophistication and class is key to their perceived distinction from the Grounders. In addition, the Mountain Men could qualify as a racial group, which the ICTR in Akayesu (¶514) has considered to be conventionally defined “based on the hereditary physical traits often...
29.10.24 | |

12 Aug

...peacefully. However, this architecture leaves many questions unanswered. Is anticipatory or preventive self-defence permitted under customary international law? What qualifies as an “armed attack” sufficient to trigger Article 51? Can humanitarian intervention ever be lawful absent Security Council authorisation? What status do doctrines such as the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) or “pro-democratic intervention” hold? In the absence of authoritative interpretive guidance or a comprehensive codification effort, States have often interpreted the Charter’s provisions in self-serving or inconsistent ways. The result is a legal landscape shaped not by consensus, but by...
12.08.25 | |

18 Jul

...traditional forces. Meanwhile, self-regulation initiatives, while mostly well-intentioned, have proven largely ineffective: lacking binding authority and meaningful repercussions, they fail to compel either companies or states to act responsibly. Fundamentally, the functionality and effectiveness of self-regulation relies solely on its incentive effect and the voluntary participation that depends on it. Most importantly: self-regulation can principally just bind those who are willing to be bound. The individual voluntary certification under a self-regulatory regime renders no effect on entities who offer services to clients who either do not care about oversight, control...
18.07.25 | |

05 Sep

Anyone familiar with foreign relations law hears the common refrain that treaties almost never supersede statutes under the last-in-time rule. Until recently, it was certainly my understanding that the ancient Supreme Court case of Cook v. United States was the only significant example in which a self-executing treaty trumped an earlier conflicting statute. But my recent research on the last-in-time rule indicates that there are several examples in which that rule has been applied to give effect to a self-executing treaty that conflicts with an earlier federal statute. In particular,...
05.09.14 | |

22 Feb

...to the nation-state that signed its royal charter. Consider that England even ceded Bombay to the EIC. Relevant for the discussion we had, the EIC also raised an in-house army that waged (many) wars. Vitoria announced war makes states. Swati Srivastava retorts: war also awakens sovereigns. Despite not possessing a monopoly over political power—as Westphalia insists—the EIC used war to expand its land holdings. Over time, it experienced a form of sovereign awakening, spurred by its tax and war activities in Bengal. Seeing itself as self-sustaining, it declared it possessed...
22.02.23 | |

28 Sep

...none of us is safe. And here, in relevant part, is Wittes’ response (emphasis mine): So the real authority is limited not just by geography and governance but by the nature of the target himself. That is, the president may only target an American national when when he has concluded in good faith that this person is either covered by the AUMF or poses a sufficiently-immediate threat to the country so as to trigger its right to self-defense. In other words, Adam’s fear that “the president can have someone executed...
28.09.10 | |

06 Apr

rights to "individual, or collective self-defense," under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter! If Hamas continues to launch its rockets from population centers, Israel must take such measures as are feasible to minimize civilian casualties, but is not otherwise required to refrain from responding to threats to its national security. The unvarnished reality is that this conflict will continue until either Israel devastates Gaza in this perpetual war, or the Hamas barbarians succeed on the battlefield, which seems even far less likely to occur! Kevin Jon Heller Mike 71, With...
06.04.11 | |

29 Sep

I just wanted to note that I have posted to SSRN The Language of Law and the Practice of Politics: Great Powers and the Rhetoric of Self-Determination in the Cases of Kosovo and South Ossetia, which is part of the special issue of the Chicago Journal of International Law about great power politics to which Ken has referred a couple of times. Here’s the abstract: This Article, written for a special issue of the Chicago Journal of International Law concerning great power politics, seeks to elucidate whether and how international...
29.09.09 | |

08 Jun

lack of analysis of congressional-executive agreements. One of his most salient points is that our book argues for an international agreement-making process that is way too onerous to be practical or to fit within the Framer’s original understanding of the U.S. Constitution. I have some responses: 1) It’s not really that hard since many treaties today are non-self-executing; 2) the Framers envisioned at least some non-self-executing treaties could be made. In any event, it is not a long podcast and Marty’s thoughts on most questions is definitely worth listening to....
08.06.12 | |

13 Oct

Jordan Serious problems exist with the law of war rationale, because under international law the U.S. simply cannot be at war or in an armed conflict with al Qaeda. The alternative expressed previously by the Executive is the law of self-defense, the self-defense paradigm, which permits targetings of those who are DPAA as well as their capture. Another problem is that a U.S. warship is the equivalent of U.S. territory under international law and the Constitution. Boumediene and the many cases cited therein, plus Toscanino and Tiede, the recognitions in...
13.10.13 | |

15 Feb

...ruling that the Texas courts did not have to respect the international tribunal’s ruling because the treaty provision (UN Charter Article 94) was “non-self-executing.” In other words, the treaty itself did not merit Supremacy Clause effect in the face of “Contrary” state law, but required an implementing federal statute to have such effect. How can this be squared with the plain language of the Supremacy Clause, which does not distinguish between treaties or statutes in ordaining what is the “supreme Law of the Land”? David Sloss’s marvelous book The Death...
15.02.17 | |

17 Mar

...domestic constitutional issue. The more interesting question involves implied immunity under the self-defense paradigm when laws of war are not applicable (as noted in my 19 J. Trans. L. & Pol'y article in 2009). If targeting is permissible under the law of self-defense (in time of peace or in time of war), it appears that general patterns of practice and opinio juris regarding such practices support an implied immunity for lawful self-defense targetings (no known prosecutions, etc.). This should also inform the domestic constitutional issue. Kevin Jon Heller John, The...
17.03.13 | |