Law Commons^™

International Decision: Munaf V. Geren, Harlan G. Cohen

Scholarly Works

This International Decision case comment, the final version of which will be published in Volume 102, No. 4, of the American Journal of International Law (forthcoming), examines the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Munaf v. Geren, a case arising out of U.S. operations in Iraq and allegations of potential torture in Iraqi custody. In that decision, a unanimous Supreme Court held that the federal courts have jurisdiction under the habeas corpus statute to hear claims brought by American citizens held overseas by American forces "operating subject to an American chain of command, even when those forces are acting as a …

Starting From Here, Ashley R. Deeks

International Law Studies

No abstract provided.

People's Tribunal On Torture Karnataka Report, Saumya Uma

Dr. Saumya Uma

People's Tribunal On Torture Rajasthan Report, Saumya Uma

Dr. Saumya Uma

Victims And Promise Of Remedies: International Law Fairytale Gone Bad, Sanja Djajic

San Diego International Law Journal

The aim of this Article is to examine such developments and the current availability of remedies for human rights violations in general. The Author will also examine the appropriateness of such remedies and opportunities to pursue them. The Article starts by identifying remedies in international law. This is followed by a case study and analysis of attempts by several national judiciaries to grapple with remedies prescribed by international law, against the background of international and national remedies. In the course of examining the reasons for an inadequate remedial structure, the Article will focus on several national cases. They will illustrate …

The Bounds Of Necessity, Jens David Ohlin

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

The current controversy surrounding the legality of torture can only be understood through an analysis of the distinction between justified necessity and excused necessity. Although there may be strong prudential reasons for international criminal courts to declare torture unlawful under any circumstance, this would not necessarily prevent a court from recognizing that an excuse may apply. However, the hallmark of the necessity excuse should not be understood, as it is in German law, as an exception that only applies when a defendant breaks the law to save someone close to him. Rather, the basic principle of the excuse ought to …

A Hartman Hotz Symposium: Intelligence, Law, And Democracy, Steve Sheppard, Robin Butler, William Howard Taft Iv, Alberto Mora

Steve Sheppard

On April 25, 2007, the Hartman Hotz Trust of the University of Arkansas hosted a symposium to discuss the relationships between intelligence, law, and democracy. This article contains a transcript of the topics discussed at the symposium. Don Bobbit, Dean of the Fulbright College introduced the panel, and Steve Sheppard, Enfield Professor of Law, moderated the discussion. The panelists included three guests with experience in the intelligence field: Lord Robin Butler, former head of the British Civil Service; Alberto Mora, former General Counsel of the United States Navy; and William Howard Taft IV, former Acting Secretary of Defense and Legal …

"Behind This Mortal Bone": The (In)Effectiveness Of Torture, Jeannine Bell

Indiana Law Journal

This Essay addresses the theoretical debate on torture in an empirical way. It urges that as part of our evaluation of the merits of torture, we take a shrewd look at the quality of information brutal interrogations produce. The Essay identifies widespread belief in what the author identifies as the "torture myth "-the idea that torture is the most effective interrogation practice. In reality, in addition to its oft-acknowledged moral and legal problems, the use of torture carries with it a host of practical problems which seriously blunt its effectiveness. This Essay demonstrates that contrary to the myth, torture and …

Tainted Provenance: When, If Ever, Should Torture Evidence Be Admissible, Michael P. Scharf

Faculty Publications

Written by a consultant to the United Nation's newly established Cambodia Genocide Tribunal, "Tainted Provenance" examines one of the most important legal questions that will face the Tribunal as it begins its trials next year -- whether evidence of the Khmer Rouge command structure that came from interrogation sessions at the infamous Tuol Sleng torture facility should be considered notwithstanding the international exclusionary rule for evidence procured by torture. The issue of whether there should be exceptions to the torture evidence exclusionary rule (and how those exceptions should be crafted to avoid abuse) has significant implications beyond the international tribunal, …

Tinkering With Torture In The Aftermath Of Hamdan: Testing The Relationship Between Internationalism And Constitutionalism, Catherine Powell

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Bridging international and constitutional law scholarship, the author examines the question of torture in light of democratic values. The focus in this article is on the international prohibition on torture as this norm was addressed through the political process in the aftermath of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld. Responding to charges that the international torture prohibition--and international law generally--poses irreconcilable challenges for democracy and our constitutional framework, the author contends that by promoting respect for fundamental rights and for minorities and outsiders, international law actually facilitates a broad conception of democracy and constitutionalism. She takes on the question of torture within …