Search: self-defense

...for perpetrating the acts of abuse at Abu Ghraib. That finding had been supported in the 12 other major reviews conducted by the Department of Defense, the delegation said. There had been a total of 120 deaths of detainees in Department of Defense control in Afghanistan and Iraq. There had been no deaths in Guantanamo. The vast majority of deaths were caused by factors such as natural causes, injuries sustained on the battlefield, or detainee-on-detainee violence. In only 29 cases had abuse or other violations of law or policy been...

...that they will be tortured” – a claim that everyone outside the Administration knows to be patently false. Worse still, he has rationalized his refusal to offer evidence in defense of that mantra with the excuse that “as much as we would like to deny the numerous inaccurate charges made against our government, because many of the accusations relate to alleged intelligence activities, we have found that we cannot comment upon them except in a general way.” And what about military activities? Is it hyperbolic and absurd to be outraged...

inapplicability of the "law enforcement" paradigm when targetings are justifiable under the laws of war and/or the law of self-defense. The U.S. has claimed lawfulness under the laws of war (which I disagree with regarding targetings outside of the theatre of the real war in Afghanistan and, de facto, parts of Pakistan or regarding targetings of persons who are DPH in connection with that international armed conflict who are located elsewhere) as well as the law of self-defense. Both the AI and HRW reports use the wrong tests and criteria...

...executive powers, abridged individual liberties and collective self-sacrifice. Second, Mr. Bellinger’s belief that the United States is in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda is the sin qua non of his overarching analysis. The United States acts in self-defense after attacks on its “embassies, military vessels, financial center, military headquarters and capital city, killing more than 3000 people in the process.” However, this assertion depends upon these assaults being “armed attacks”. In the aftermath of 9/11, sympathetic international organizations – foremost, the UN Security Council and NATO – averred that they...

...decision. But the issue was not before the Court in this case, and had not been raised by the defendant as a reason for dismissal, apart from asserting the defense in their answer to the complaint filed in 2006. Let’s back up and review the facts. When Plaintiffs filed their original suit in 2002, they chose to sue only two Shell entities: the Shell parent entity, based in the Netherlands and U.K. (“Shell Europe” for the purposes of this post), and Shell’s Nigerian subsidiary, which allegedly aided and abetted the...

...out by the Luftwaffe rather than the 2nd SS Panzer Division? And here’s a snippet from Ronald Radosh’s opening argument, for the “defense”: The essence of Nobile’s case is based on a highly legalistic and a-historical citation of Article 6 of The Nuremburg Charter. Nobile takes it further, by extending the description of war criminal to Truman’s entire atomic cabinet, his chain of command, the pilots on the Enola Gay, and all those politicians who through the years have praised what he calls “the atrocities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” His...

[ Klaudia Klonowska is a PhD Researcher at the Asser Institute and the University of Amsterdam, and is serving as Managing Director of the Manual on the International Law Applicable to Artificial Intelligence in Warfare. Sofie van der Maarel is Assistant Professor in Military Ethics and Leadership at the Netherlands Defense Academy and affiliated to Radboud University Nijmegen.] Introduction The concept of “deep sensing” has been steadily gaining traction in military discussions and media coverage, especially in the U.S., indicating an emerging buzzword amongst marketing strategies surrounding emerging military technologies....

...is a different one. Instead of enhancing robust interaction between the prosecution and defense, these trial-avoiding and trial-condensing procedures have created a separate track of expedited, prosecutor-dominated justice alongside the adversarial one. The vast majority of defendants see their cases decided at the prosecutor-controlled investigation stage or directed through an abbreviated adjudication stage with little activity by either the judge or defense. Admittedly, that most cases are decided without a contested trial is not shocking. What is concerning is that the trumpeted adversarial reforms are not permeating into efficiency-driven procedures...

the treaties grant investors rights but not obligations, while imposing upon states obligations unaccompanied by rights. Accordingly, he suggests that the corruption defense effectively creates investor obligations, which begin to address the BIT imbalance. I am not entirely persuaded such a perspective adds to the analysis. After all, a corruption defense does not impose any meaningful obligation whose breach entitles states to bring claims against investors; it simply affords states cover from investor claims, cover that is surely undeserved if the states themselves participated in the misbehavior. In closing, let...

...immunity is a substantive defense, then there is indeed a tension between the attribution point and the 2001 Draft Articles on State Responsibility, article 58 of which expressly states that its rules on attribution are “without prejudice to any question of the individual responsibility under international law of any person acting on behalf of a State.” If immunity is a procedural defense, however, one that does not go at all to individual responsibility but instead to available fora, then the purported tension – or what Bill calls a flat contradiction...

...acting under duress. Article 31 of the Rome Statute, Grounds for excluding criminal responsibility, para 1(c) stipulates that "The person acts reasonably to defend himself or herself or another person or, in the case of war crimes, property which is essential for the survival of the person or another person or property which is essential for accomplishing a military mission, against an imminent and unlawful use of force in a manner proportionate to the degree of danger to the person or the other person or property protected." Israel is infamous...

closed doors this week in the Senate. Because, from all indications, Carl Levin’s Senate Armed Services Committee is conducting its multi-day committee mark-up of the FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act - concluding late Thursday evening - entirely in “CLOSED” committee session. Jordan Response... The President already has constitutionally-based authority to engage in permissible self-defense under Article 51 of the U.N. Charter -- Obama's duty and competence faithfully to execute the laws, which (of course) include treaty-based and customary international law. Constitutional "principles" do not limit the President's competence to...