Search: self-defense

...gained now would be lost in legal battles and hurdles along the way. The real problem is that the ICTY has put itself in a corner with the infamous Seselj decisions on self-representation, by saying that it cannot impose counsel unless a clear warning is given to the accused, and the accused persists in obstructing the proceedings. The better way would have been to always impose counsel (just like courts would do in Serbia and Bosnia, btw, which would have jurisdiction if the ICTY was not there) but at the...

...Kosovo. Chris Borgen Corina: Thank you for your comments. I will analyze the legal rationale in a post later this week. Amin Ghanbari Now it has been just expectable to see any state of a federal system self determine it self in the light of the Post-Cold war era evolutions of international law and specially the general practice of other states concerning the issue of the right of self determination; but there is a question left unseen about people who are non members of a federal state, hopeful to self...

...overriding African state interests through the legal regime of the UN and the Security Council overlooks the obvious reality that state self-interest and state priorities have long animated the Council [...] The view from below then is not that international law as shaped by the Council has transcended state self-interest, but that only the interests and priorities of some states are relevant." "critics of South Africa and the AU do not acknowledge the dangers of infecting the ICC with the Council’s legitimacy deficits. The reliance on the Security Council as...

...previous law or treaty forbids. On a related note, is legislation which forecloses judicial application of preexisting and otherwise self executing treaties constitutional? A treaty is either self-executing and directly applicable or not. One may argue that the intent of the executive and of the Senate (as well the language of the treaty) have a bearing on whether the treaty is self executing but shouldnt' that be restricted to the intent at the time the treaty was negotiated and ratified. Once a treaty is deemed self-executing and directly applicable can...

...are somewhat uncertain and courts will certainly give Congress broad discretion to regulate those rights. (2) The amendment would create congressional oversight over the procedures governing the detention of the Guantanamo detainees because the Defense Department would have to submit their procedures for determinations as to the legal status of those detainees to Congress as well as any changes in the procedure. (3) The most controversial part of the Amendment is the part removing the jurisdiction of the federal courts from “any action” based on the DoD’s new policies on...

I have written before about the Bush Administration’s war on attorneys who defend individuals accused of terrorism. (See here and here.) A new front has now been opened in that war, with the chief U.S. military prosecutor accusing Major Michael Mori, who is representing David Hicks — the Australian scheduled to be the first GITMO detainee tried by military commission — of violating the Orwellian article 88 of the UCMJ, which prohibits the use of “contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary...

...ad bellum issue does not arise, but there still might or might not be violations of the jus in bello. Syria certainly poses a jus ad bellum issue, but there the US justification might not be preemptive self-defense, but self-defense against an armed attack that was already committed by a non-state actor operating from Syrian territory, which Syria failed to prevent. In any case it is hard to say more about these events without knowing much, much more about the actual facts. Guneysu In addition to what Milan has written,...

Amos Guiora has an essay up on Jurist concerning the Israeli military operations in Gaza. He writes: The IDF launched Cast Lead after two significant developments: Hamas had fired 6,000 missiles from the Gaza Strip into southern Israel during the past three years after Israel had unilaterally disengaged from the Gaza Strip and Hamas had unilaterally violated an Egyptian negotiated cease-fire. This is classic self-defense; to that extent, Operation Cast Lead is not different. From a legal perspective, however, there are three critical differences between Cast Lead and previous IDF...

defense is qualified by Article 8.8, a new provision stating that ‘Human rights due diligence shall not automatically absolve’ a business from liability.  Rather, a court (or competent authority) will decide on liability ‘after an examination of compliance with applicable human rights due diligence standards.’  What does this mean? That a business whose HRDD complies with applicable standards has an automatic defense?  Or not?  And what are those applicable HRDD standards? Article 8.8 is indicating that the mere fact of conducting HRDD cannot be used as a safe harbour for...

...said to have replied with a defense of the legislation, calling foreign funding of nonprofits interference in Israel’s internal affairs. A senior Israeli official acknowledged that if the bills pass in their current form, they would cause a severe crisis with the EU. Standley has contacted all of the embassies in Israel that represent EU countries, urging them to register their own concerns regarding the legislation. EU ambassadors here are to meet on Tuesday to discuss the issue. The office of the EU in Israel has also approached the embassies...

I know you have all missed my blogging about international trade law. So now that I’m back (at least for a while), let me highlight a neat legal issue raised by China in its appeal of a recent WTO decision against its restrictions on foreign media. According to this WSJ report, China has raised the “public morals” defense contained in Article XIV of the General Agreement on Trade in Services to challenge a WTO panel report on Chinese restrictions on the distribution of foreign media within China. The public morals...

...was quite different from what is now being reported in the press. I would argue that there were omissions of consequence.” At his briefing in the White House Situation Room, Daschle was forbidden to take notes, bring staff or speak with anyone about what he had been told. “You’re so disadvantaged,” Daschle says. “They know so much more than you do. You don’t even know what questions to ask.” Moreover, the secrecy defense presumes that the Bush administration kept the NSA program secret because it believed that was the only...