In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Search: unwilling or unable

04 May

...any violations of the laws of war require the ICC to intervene. Someone please clarify. Kevin Heller Daniel, The ICC is based on the principle of complementarity, but the Court can assert jurisdiction if a country is not only unable to investigate and/or prosecute a case itself, but also if it "unwilling" to do so. So although the U.S. could in theory divest the ICC of jurisdiction over any case involving a U.S. national, it would have to satisfy the Court that it was genuinely willing to investigate and prosecute...
04.05.07 | |

07 Aug

...over when national criminal justice institutions are unwilling or unable to act ... To deter future war criminals. http://legal.un.org/icc/general/overview.htm Every time the ICC has been publicly criticized for avoiding one of those aims, its brand name has tanked pretty fast. So, I tend to disagree that the ICC can make the situation any worse by doing its job and failing, than 130 years of colonization, armed conflicts, and politicization have already accomplished. The Prosecutors may think they know how to slow walk things, but few other conflicts have their own...
07.08.14 | |

25 Oct

...THAT I declined the request of the OTP to change my Statements and explained to them that I considered it unlawful and morally objectionable to give false testimony but they were unwilling to let my testimony stand as I had previously recorded it. I threatened to withdraw as a Witness if they continued to pressurize me to alter my Statement to include any matters that were either false or strange to me. Subsequently, I was charged in Court with the offences of mistreating my children. The Court found that I...
25.10.13 | |

02 Aug

...may become relevant under the ICC Statute and for the purpose of the admissibility of a case … if under domestic law there are mechanisms to provide redress in respect of the said violations. If stated differently in terms of unwillingness to prosecute by referring to grave misconduct by the executive aimed at move the justiciary to stay the proceeding (e.g. under the abuse of process doctrine), perhaps the position would have been more acceptable. Even if in my opinion it is time for international jurisdictions to re-think their positions...
02.08.12 | |

21 Nov

...to try KSM, the federal courts are the way to do it. The article discussed the ineffectiveness of the military commissions, for practical and political reasons it makes sense to use the federal courts. Practically, it seems that the military commissions are unable or unwilling to provide the sentences and convictions which should be forthcoming in these cases. Politically, trying terrorists in federal courts is a continuation of President Bush's policies (though Republicans have already and no doubt will continue to argue against trial in federal courts), which provides consistency,...
21.11.09 | |

20 Mar

...the ‘court of final appeal’ of the world at large, the monistic view cannot be altered simply when a State organ disagrees with some of the ICJ’s conclusions. These are the grounds for submitting that the FR’s position seemingly accepts a Kelsenian and monistic approach on the relations between the international and the domestic sphere. Even so, the FR advocates for a different (compared to the one adopted by the ICJ) taxonomy in the hierarchical order, where fundamental rights (given the fact that the FRG seems unwilling to open diplomatic...
20.03.18 | |

07 Sep

...will just have to ignore them." While agreeing that discrimination decisions have to be made, what about differences between military vs. intelligence apparatus discrimination decisions. If, for example, military targeters are unwilling to designate someone as a target, but the intelligence community is willing to designate the person as a target the conflict I would imagine would be resolved at the Principals level. The Principals never or rarely have an incentive to not target someone, so the intelligence targeting would appear to prevail. I am not sanguine about National Security...
07.09.10 | |

06 Oct

...that "the insurgents respected the laws of war" as Lauterpacht himself preferred, so I am not sure that "echoed by the Supreme Court" is appropriate -- perhaps echoed mostly by.... Jordan Response... p.s. for other "readers" free download of the self-defense targetigs article at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1520717 Kevin Jon Heller Jordan, We'll just have to agree to disagree about that. Nothing in DRC or Wall supports the "unwilling or unable" standard; both agree that imputability is required, although whether they agree with the restrictive Nicaragua test is, as Ruys discusses, certainly open...
06.10.11 | |

17 Sep

...human rights standard is far less limiting, requiring merely that detention not be "arbitrary." Mark Erickson Deborah, no disrespect (I very much appreciate your work), but you entirely miss the real important points here, which are at 50,000 ft. Brennan and the administration think they can shoot at whoever they like, as long as the targets can be said to be Islamic extremists and where they are is a weak state. (unable or unwilling...) Almost strategic ambiguity on AUMF is a bonus for them, and as long as the current...
17.09.11 | |

01 May

...our priorities lie? Do we twist international law to avoid domestic US legal pitfalls, or do we address these structural domestic problems directly? How can Justice Kennedy, for example, be willing to say that CA3 applies to Hamdan, but be unwilling to say that Art. 75 of Protocol I does, when all US administrations until the present one have consistently stated that Art. 75 codifies existing customary law? It's totally absurd. How can the US Supreme Court, after two centuries of constitutional jurisprudence, still not clearly pronounce even on some...
01.05.07 | |

08 Feb

Benjamin Davis "The very notion of armed conflict appears to be going through a process of shape-shifting whereby the use of new technologies such as drones or cyber-operations are slowly erasing the crucial significance of geographical boundaries, truncating vast distances, and diminishing the need for boots on the ground." I suspect that the real shape shifting is the "unable and unwilling" formulation that some seek to argue is a legal rule as opposed to a political rationalization to aggression into self-defense. That formulation is the link across geography for the...
08.02.13 | |

04 Feb

...ideas of personal and collective responsibility, and building mutual understanding across nations and across generations.' I think Stern offers reasons that either supplement or support those in the Charnovitz paper. In any case, I would think that the more countries committed to a WEO, the greater the likelihood some pressure would be brought to bear on nations with weak commitments (i.e, insufficient political will). In another article from the Boston Review the authors note that 'China has taken a wait-and-see approach in the international climate change negotiations, unwilling to discuss...
04.02.07 | |