Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Afghanistan

Notre Dame Law School

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Affirming The Ban On Harsh Interrogation, Mary Ellen O'Connell Jan 2005

Affirming The Ban On Harsh Interrogation, Mary Ellen O'Connell

Journal Articles

Beginning in 2002, lawyers for the Bush Administration began producing the now infamous legal memoranda on the subject of interrogation. The memoranda advise interrogators that they can torture people without fear of prosecution in connection with the so-called global war on terror. Much has been and will be written about the expedient and erroneous legal analysis of the memos. One issue at risk of being overlooked, however, because the memos emphasize torture, is that the United States must respect limits far short of torture in the conduct of interrogations. The United States may not use any form of coercion against …


American Exceptionalism And The International Law Of Self-Defense, Mary Ellen O'Connell Jan 2002

American Exceptionalism And The International Law Of Self-Defense, Mary Ellen O'Connell

Journal Articles

Following the September 11th attacks in the United States (U.S.), one could make a case for America's use of force in Afghanistan as a lawful exercise of the right of self-defense. But the proposals to invade Iraq following September 11th cannot be so defended. Those proposals did not concern defending the basic security of the U.S. in the sense that basic security defense is currently understood in the international community. They concerned, rather, defense of a more expansive concept of security, a concept wherein the U.S. need not tolerate antagonistic regimes with the potential to harm U.S. interests. The invasion …


Soviet Prisoners In The Afghan Conflict, Mary Ellen O'Connell Jan 1985

Soviet Prisoners In The Afghan Conflict, Mary Ellen O'Connell

Journal Articles

In May 1982, the International Committee of the Red Cross negotiated an agreement that facilitates prisoner of war exchanges from the Afghan conflict. Despite its creation, numerous problems exist that hinder its effective implementation. This Article examines those problems and discusses the benefits of these types of agreements. Ultimately, it is proposed that the ICRC should continue its efforts to develop these agreements to continue improving the international law that governs civil war and internal conflict.