Omar Khadr's trial began a couple of days ago at Guantanamo. Here is what the prosecutor said in his opening statement: This trial is about holding an Al Qaeda terrorist accountable for his actions and vindicating the laws of war. Two small problems with this. Throwing a grenade at U.S. soldiers is not an act of terrorism. And four out...
Two commenters on my previous post on Kagame's increasing authoritarianism questioned whether Rwanda arrested Peter Erlinder because of his representation of defendants at the ICTR. Fortuitously, Kate Gibson -- my colleague on the Karadzic case and a defense attorney at the ICTR -- has just published an ASIL Insight on the arrest that supports my claim. Here is a taste...
Hell must have had central air conditioning installed, because I find myself in complete agreement with Ruth Wedgwood's recent post at EJIL: Talk! on Paul Kagame's rapid descent into authoritarianism. Here is a snippet: The West’s failure to address Tutsi violations of the laws of war has allowed Kagame to conclude, justifiably, that he can do nearly anything with...
Justice Ginsburg has fired the latest salvo in the ongoing debate about the Court's use of foreign and international law sources in constitutional adjudication. On Friday, she gave a speech to the International Academy of Comparative Law at American University, entitled "A decent respect to the Opinions of [Human]kind": The Value of a Comparative Perspective in Constitutional Adjudication. Not surprisingly given her...
Greg McNeal has passed along the sad news that Charles Gittings, a long-time commenter on Opinio Juris, has passed away at an untimely 57. Here is a snippet from his obituary in the Los Angeles Times: Though not a lawyer, Gittings had a life-long interest in military tactics and law that led him to become an invaluable resource to some...
The following is a guest post by Scott Paul, the Making Amends Campaign Fellow with the Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict. I'm delighted to welcome Scott to OJ; in his previous life, he was was one of my favorite bloggers -- a regular contributor to The Washington Note and Bolton Watch. Mohammad was approaching a checkpoint with his brother...
The following is a guest post by Greg Gordon, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Human Rights and Genocide Studies at the University of North Dakota. He attended the Review Conference on behalf of the International League for Human Rights. A VIEW OF THE AGGRESSION AMENDMENTS FROM KAMPALA Having been on the ground in Kampala, my take on...
I haven't had enough time to blog about Philip Alston's excellent report on drone warfare, but interested readers should check out today's conversation between Scott Horton and Alston at Harpers.com. Here's a taste of one of Alston's answers: Of course, calling something a war crime doesn’t make it so–the question is whether it is recognized as such under international ...
I know Ken's busy finishing his book and can't yet reply to Marko's remarkable post. (And personal congrats, Marko, on the lectureship. Nottingham is lucky to have you!) When he does, I hope he'll address the criminal-law aspects of his belief that self-defense justifies targeted killings outside of armed conflict. I have two scenarios in mind, borrowed and adapted from...
I do have a question for Ken. As his post indicates, he believes that the US's right to "self-defense" justifies drone strikes against designated terrorists outside of armed conflict -- strikes that are governed by human-rights law, not international humanitarian law. Indeed, he writes that "if one takes the US’s independent self-defense view, then curiously, the CIA is on...
A couple of years ago, I blogged about how Salim Hamdan was prosecuted in a military commission for conspiring to commit the non-existent war crime "murder in violation of the law of war." Hamdan was acquitted on that count, but the crime is starring again in the unconscionable prosecution of child-soldier Omar Khadr. That's unfortunate in itself -- but what...
Professor Schuck has graciously permitted me to post his response. Here it is: I am grateful for the comments that have been posted about my op-ed, and believe that John correctly captures my position. It is common for the law to permit finders of fact to draw inferences from conduct, including inferences that are contrary to the words used by the...
