Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response

Charter did not permit an individual to be convicted solely of criminal membership; he could be convicted of criminal membership only if he had committed at least one substantive crime as part of the criminal organization. Indeed, both the Ministries and Einsatzgruppen tribunals held exactly that (see pp. 293 of my book.) Here, of course, the response will no doubt be that al-Bahlul was convicted “in connection with any act of which the individual may be convicted” — namely, material support for terrorism. In which case a conviction for one...

...his "tattered, 20-year old ID card" (the ostensible reason: living for a time abroad caused him to forfeit his status as permanent resident of Israel). When pressed about the ruling against Awad, Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir referred reporters "to the security services." This by way of a reminder that we hardly have sufficient or even presumptive reason to trust what official Israeli government spokespersons say about such matters, while David Ketzmer's book on the Israeli Supreme Court, The Occupation of Justice...(2002) provides us with ample reason not to defer to...

...“armed attacks” in self defense. Many states also recognize at least some limited customary right post-UN Charter of anticipatory self-defense – that is, a right to strike before the enemy begins its attack. This notion was captured by the Caroline letter’s statement requiring for such force “the necessity of self-defence, instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means, and no moment for deliberation.” Either way, whether force is in response to an armed attack or in anticipation of an imminent one, if a state undertakes such action, its response must be,...

...rich Saudis to fund it, and among the richest Saudis are Saudi princes. You could at least, in the interest of common courtesy (a) retain the link to the Schwarzschild post when you repost my response, because otherwise you are not really reposting my response, you are selectively reposting part of it; and (b) acknowledge that YOU read something in to my princes remark that wasn't there. And, if you want to add another update, I'll endorse what Anne wrote, that HRW's support of the Goldstone report puts it in...

The current issue of Foreign Affairs has an article called A Few Dollars at a Time: How to Tap Consumers for Development, which describes the “innovative financing” movement in which private companies find ways for their customers to contribute to international development. This morning, I came across an example that I guess you could call “innovative aid” as it isn’t so much development financing but rather disaster relief to Haiti. Zynga is a software company that makes (wildly successful, as I understand) games playable via Facebook and MySpace. They have...

and the acknowledgement by the General Assembly of this Declaration in resolution 43/177 of 15 December 1988." See A/66/371–S/2011/592 Hostage Response... Regarding the comment that “[t]he only case in favor of jurisdiction was always a set of political arguments in search of a valid legal vehicle that was never found.” Many scholars treat the Montevideo Convention as if it were a textbook, instead of an agreement between states that still has full legal effect and force. Even if recognition of statehood is a purely political act, it still has legal...

Our thanks to everyone who has participated in this symposium—John Bellinger, David Sloss, Chimene Keitner, and Steve Vladeck—as well as to Matt Christiansen, who has coordinated the symposium for YJIL. It’s been such a pleasure to see the thoughtful and varied reactions to our Article. Here we take the opportunity to offer a few brief words in response to round out the symposium. First, we very much appreciate John Bellinger’s generous and kind response. We know that John labored long and hard to bring the Medellin case to a different...

...because international law entitles only the members of a state’s regular armed forces to participate in hostilities, the CIA had no authority under international law to use armed force against al-Awlaki. The CIA is not part of the US’s regular armed forces. There is, of course, an obvious response to that objection: namely, that the availability of the PAJ depends on domestic US law, not on international law, so it is irrelevant whether the CIA had the right under international law to used armed force against al-Awlaki. Because AQAP was...

...a state actor, the response must comply with the United Nations Charter and customary international law. On the other hand, if the attacker is a non-state actor, domestic criminal law will likely govern the response. In addition, international law requires a state to characterize an attack to avoid using force against an entity that inadvertently launched a cyber attack. A state may be able to use force against a hostile attack under its own laws, but international law prohibits the use of force against an inadvertent attack. When a state...

...pretty good Navy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_marque Richard Response... Anyone interested in US naval doctrine regarding the law of naval warfare should look at the Commander's Handbook on that subject, http://www.nwc.navy.mil/cnws/ild/documents/1-14M_(Jul_2007)_(NWP).pdf. It's a tri-service (USN/USMC/USCG) publication and covers the use of force across the spectrum of maritime contingencies, including piracy. Rob Isn't the British order to ignore pirates a violation of UNCLOS? Bandit Meanwhile, the British have instructed their navy to ignore pirates, out of the remarkable fear that any captured Somali pirates might have asylum claims on metropolitan Britain. As we all...

...Amnesty International, however, disagrees: the BBC quotes Marek Marczynski, the head of the organization’s International Justice campaign, as claiming that the OTP’s decision “breaches the Rome Statute which clearly states that such matters should be considered by the institution’s judges.” I think Marczynski is wrong about that: nothing in the Rome Statute says that the judges get to decide whether an entity qualifies as a state for purposes of jurisdiction, at least in the first instance. The problem is that nothing in the Rome Statute specifically entrusts that decision to...

“the threat or use of force” in Article 2(4), it permits the exercise of self-defense only in response to an armed attack, not to threats of force or acts that constitute uses of force but that do not amount to armed attacks. Although it has not directly addressed the doctrines of anticipatory or preemptive self-defense, the case law of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) supports this reading of the Charter. In the Nicaragua Case, the Court called an armed attack the “condition sine qua non” for using force in...