Search: Affective Justice: Book Symposium: A Response
04 May Quick Thoughts on UBL’s Killing — and a Response to Lewis
...support characterizing this as a military operation conducted under the laws of armed conflict and not a law enforcement operation. This is not necessarily wrong, but it is at least misleading. Although how a state chooses to respond to a threat from a non-state actor is relevant to whether hostilities rise to the level of armed conflict, the form of the response — military or law-enforcement — does not determine whether an armed conflict exists. It is simply one factor, the importance of which is debatable. States do not get...
04 Jan A Response to Mariniello About the Palestine Investigation
all of its investigations and cases. Conclusion There are other problematic claims in Mariniello’s post — that Khan has focused on crimes allegedly committed by non-state actors (such as Hamas and Israeli settlers) more than on crimes allegedly committed by Israel; that Khan has suggested the evidence against Hamas is stronger than against Israel; that Khan has predetermined that Israel’s justice system is adequate to address alleged Israeli crimes. But this response is long enough, so I will simply refer readers to my earlier post responding to the Open Letter,...
05 Sep Iran’s Threat of Retaliation
...sparking concerns in Israel about the possibility of an imminent attack. This situation further coincided with the killing of Fuad Shukr, a senior Hezbollah commander (also supported by Iran), in an Israeli airstrike on a suburb of Beirut, the Lebanese capital. Time has since passed without any major response to those initial threats by the international community leaving Israel and the broader Middle East in a state of on-going hostility and tension. While the nature and severity of Iran’s overall response remains unclear, Iran has issued a prime facie threat...13 Jul An e-SOS for Cyberspace by Duncan B. Hollis
[This post is part of the Second Harvard International Law Journal/Opinio Juris Symposium.] In 2007, I authored two papers — one for a military audience and another for a legal one — arguing that debates over the law’s response to the growing range of cyberthreats would likely track ongoing debates over law’s response to terrorism. In that context, we’ve seen 4 options emerge: First, those who say terrorism is a crime, and only a crime, with any legal response limited to law enforcement mechanisms. Second, those who insist terrorism is...08 Jun Human Rights and Human Trafficking: Quagmire or Firm Ground? A Response to James Hathaway
[Dr. Anne T. Gallagher is the Head of Operations at Equity International, Technical Director of Asia Regional Trafficking in Persons Project, and the former UN Adviser on Trafficking] My response to James Hathaway, written with the benefit of close involvement in the development of the new legal framework, as well as in its implementation at the national level in over forty countries, provides an alternative and a sharply differing perspective on the global battle to combat trafficking. In considering each of Hathaway’s major concerns in turn, and discrediting the assumptions...17 Jan A Response to Ohlin about IHL and IHRL
The following is a guest-post by Gabor Rona, the International Legal Director of Human Rights First. It is a response to a post at LieberCode by Jens Ohlin, a Professor at Cornell Law School, that argues international human rights law (IHRL) does not apply in armed conflict, because it is displaced by international humanitarian law (IHL). Prof. Ohlin’s conclusion that IHRL doesn’t (and shouldn’t) apply in armed conflict cannot survive a more than superficial look at the lay of the legal and practical landscape. Essentially, his horse left the barn...26 Jul International Law in the U.S. Supreme Court: A Response to Professor Golove’s Essay
“response essay” to David Golove’s fascinating essay on “The Supreme Court, the War on Terror, and the American Just War Constitutional Tradition.” Like Mike Ramsey (Response Essay in Part V.E.) I find much to admire but also some things to question and debate in Professor Golove’s thought-provoking contribution to this volume. Professor Golove argues that the war-on-terror decisions in Hamdi, Rasul, Hamdan and Boumediene were striking departures from more recent precedent and principles, but were fundamentally consistent with three deeper themes from earlier periods of American constitutional history, what Professor...13 Mar A Response to Goodman About the (Supposed) Duty to Capture
...kill. Goodman has now responded with a long post of his own in which he claims that my post is “riddled with errors.” I don’t have time to recapitulate the entire debate; interested readers should head to Lawfare. (Bobby Chesney’s introduction to Goodman’s most recent response contains links to all of the contributions.) I also don’t have time to respond to all of my supposed errors. Instead, in this post, I simply want to address three of Goodman’s most problematic claims, all of which are based on selective quotation of...
01 Oct Prosecuting Putin: Creation of a Special Tribunal for Russian Aggression
...infrastructure, and cultural property. Russian troops have committed torture, wilful killing, rape, and sexual violence against Ukrainian civilians and prisoners of war. Russia has forcibly transferred Ukrainian children to Russia, in direct violation of Article 2e of the Genocide Convention. Ukraine is fighting a defensive war against aggression combined with Russian genocide. The Kremlin’s stated intent has been to destroy the Ukrainian nation and ethnicity. In response to Russia’s crimes, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky outlined a proposal for peace on October 11, 2022. He highlighted the need to promote justice...
07 Feb Symposium on Fairness, Equality, and Diversity in Open Source Investigations: The Case To (Re)new Community of Practice for the Open Source Investigative Field
perpetrators across the globe, a wealth of previously elusive information has opened up to bolster justice and truth-telling efforts, in turn spurring the growth of the open source investigative field over the last decade. However, the existing community of practice in this field is non-functioning. The status quo is for outsider researchers to form an echo chamber, mirroring, contributing to, and entrenching harms already thriving in the documentation-to-justice pipeline. Instead, how do we take good intention and turn it into truly good practice? The issues discussed below demonstrate flawed approaches...