We have invited several academic luminaries to post here at Opinio Juris over the next few days about the ongoing situation in Syria. We also are going to follow in our own footsteps from our Kiobel symposium, by inviting young academics and practitioners to submit guests posts for possible publication. We can’t guarantee we will publish every post submitted, but we...
It might be premature to declare the death of the doctrine of humanitarian intervention under international law, but there is no doubt that doctrine suffered a massive blow when the British Parliament voted against a preliminary motion in favor of military strikes on Syria. To be sure, humanitarian intervention was not directly before the Parliament, but the UK government's international...
An interesting discussion recently broke out on twitter about whether the Security Council could refer the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons -- and only the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons -- to the ICC. Instead of breaking my thoughts into 60 tweets or so, I thought I'd be old-fashioned and write a blog post instead. The issue raises a...
Yes, the title is intended to be provocative. And yes, I think chemical weapons are indeed terrible. But statements like this -- offered by John Kerry in thinly-veiled support for using military force against the Syrian government -- still give me pause (emphasis mine): What we saw in Syria last week should shock the conscience of the world. It defies any...
[Travel and other expenses related to my participation in the "100 Years Peace Palace" program provided by the Government of the Netherlands and Radio Netherlands Worldwide] August 28th will mark the 100th anniversary of the opening of the Peace Palace at The Hague. In commemoration of this, the Government of the Netherlands and Radio Netherlands Worldwide have brought a group of...
As regular readers may recall, I am skeptical that the use of chemical weapons, by itself, can justify the use of military force under current international law absent authorization from the U.N. Security Council. Of course, I wouldn't oppose the use of military force by the U.S. to stop the use of chemical weapons in Syria, I just doubt its...
My friend Dapo Akande has a superb post at EJIL: Talk! discussing whether the ICC could prosecute the use of chemical weapons by the government in Syria. I agree almost entirely with Dapo's analysis, but I do want to offer a couple of thoughts about his discussion of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties: The argument that chemical weapons are...
[Harold Hongju Koh is Sterling Professor of International Law, Yale Law School. William S. Dodge is Associate Dean for Research and Professor of Law at the University of California, Hastings College of the Law. Hannah L. Buxbaum is Interim Dean and John E. Schiller Chair in Legal Ethics at Indiana University Maurer School of Law. They are the co-authors of...
Criticism of the specific-direction requirement endorsed by the ICTY Appeals Chamber in Perišić has officially jumped the shark. According to James Stewart, the requirement would have required the British military court in Hamburg to acquit the two German businessmen who provided the Zyklon-B that the SS used to gas Jews in the death camps: In any event, let’s assume that specific direction...
Another person who should know better has misrepresented the ICTY's specific-direction requirement: Owen Bowcott, a legal correspondent for the Guardian. Here is the sub-headline of his new article on the impact of the Perisic judgment: Legal experts say proof that accused 'specifically directed' atrocities now required after tribunal acquits Serbian commanders. And here is the first paragraph of the article: Generals and politicians...
As a progressive, I'm delighted that Bradley Manning was acquitted of aiding the enemy but horrified that he was convicted of espionage. Ethically, Manning is a hero, not a spy. As a law professor, though, I think it's critically important to get the law right -- and unfortunately, many commentators are simply misstating what the Espionage Act says and how courts...
Peter's reply is posted at Lawfare, and it addresses both my criticisms (here and here) and Steve Vladeck's (here). The reply is largely non-responsive to the points that I made in my posts; most of it is dedicated to establishing that the evidence presented at trial is sufficient to conclude that al-Bahlul participated in a JCE to commit 9/11 --...
