Human Rights Law Commons^™

Human Rights And Military Decisions: Counterinsurgency And Trends In The Law Of, Dan E. Stigall, Christopher L. Blakesley, Chris Jenks

Scholarly Works

The past several decades have seen a Copernican shift in the paradigm of armed conflict, which the traditional Law of International Armed Conflict (LOIAC) canon has not fully matched. Standing out in stark relief against the backdrop of relative inactivity in LOIAC, is the surfeit of activity in the field of international human rights law, which has become a dramatic new force in the ancient realm of international law. Human rights law, heretofore not formally part of the traditional juridico-military calculus, has gained ever increasing salience in that calculus. Indeed, human rights law has ramified in such a manner that …

Queer Lockdown: Coming To Terms With The Ongoing Criminalization Of Lgbtq Communities, Ann Cammett

Scholarly Works

The criminal justice system exacts a toll on some Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer (LGBTQ) communities. The experience of living in poverty and the concomitant exposure to a variety of governmental systems puts all poor, but especially LGBTQ low-income people of color, at risk of incarceration. What typically goes unexamined are the myriad ways that LGBTQ people are drawn into and experience the carceral system because of sexual identities and expression. This negative effect surfaces at every conceivable level: the marginalization and subsequent criminalization of queer youth; anti-gay bias in the judicial system; the rerouting of domestic violence cases …

Bringing Families In: Recommendations Of The Incarceration, Reentry And Family Roundtables, Ann Cammett, Johnna Christian, Nancy Fisherman, Lori Scott-Pickens

Scholarly Works

Building on the findings of the New Jersey Reentry Roundtable and a growing concern around the state about how to improve outcomes for the more than 70,000 individuals expected to return home from prison over the next five years, the roundtable examined the complex role that families – broadly defined – play in the lives of prisoners during incarceration and after their release. This document presents a set of recommendations emerging directly from roundtable sessions and provides a road map for individual and collaborative efforts accepted by a range of key players in New Jersey, including government officials, community and …

Making Work Pay: Promoting Employment And Better Child Support Outcomes For Low-Income And Incarcerated Parents, Ann Cammett

Scholarly Works

The New Jersey Institute for Social Justice prepared this report in response to concerns about child support debt—in particular as it creates a barrier to employment for low-income parents and works at cross-purposes with the goals of the child support program. Drawing on examples from other states, this report identifies a range of policies that inform child support practice in New Jersey and offers administrative, legislative, and programmatic solutions to address child support arrears owed by low-income and incarcerated parents.

Calling Children To Account: The Proposal For A Juvenile Chamber In The Special Court For Sierra Leone, Diane Marie Amann

Scholarly Works

In a unique proposal to the United Nations Security Council, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan recommended that a Juvenile Chamber of the Special Court have authority to try defendants as young as fifteen. The plan sparked immediate controversy. Sierra Leoneans wanted the worst perpetrators punished regardless of age, while human rights organizations argued that juvenile prosecutions would weaken rehabilitative efforts. The Security Council subsequently diluted the proposal; nevertheless, it merits examination, given the increasing use, in Africa and around the world, of children in combat.

La Preuve Pénale Et Des Tests Génétiques: United States Report, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

A major problem for those analyzing U.S. criminal law and procedure is that it does not fit the Continental or British mold. There is no one single system, but parallel federal and 50 state systems each with its own legislature, laws, courts (including trial, appellate, and supreme courts), police, prosecutors and prisons. The authorities who enact and implement these laws are sovereign within their respective jurisdictions. Each state has police power over its people. The 10th amendment to the U.S. Constitution controls allocation of federal and state authority. It provides that whatever the Constitution has not designated as being within …

Terrorism And Hostages In International Law: A Commentary On The Hostages Convention 1979, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece, Professor Blakesley reviews “Terrorism and Hostages in International Law: A Commentary on the Hostages Convention 1979” by Joseph J. Lambert.

Democratic Responses To International Terrorism, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

This volume provides a multidisciplinary study of terrorism. The editor notes at the outset the difficulty of definition: "Terrorism is not a one-dimensional problem; it transcends many frontiers: political, jurisdictional, institutional, disciplinary and methodological. So approaching the problem from only one perspective may lead to only partial understanding and an incomplete strategy for developing constructive responses” (p. 3). Note the tendency of even this careful statement to assume that terrorism is always committed by others, Also, although legal definition and consideration may be implied by the terms polical, jurisdictional, institutional and disciplinary, which are indicated as various dimensions of …

Prosecuting And Defending Violations Of Genocide And Humanitarian Law: The International Tribunal For The Former Yugoslavia, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

A symposium discussing the international war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, established by the United Nations Security Council’s . Christopher L. Blakesley discussed the procedural aspects of the War Crimes Tribunal.

Obstacles To The Creation Of A Permanent War Crimes Tribunal, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Individual liability for war crimes is difficult to enforce and is unlikely to be accepted uniformly by states.

Individual criminal responsibility is the cornerstone of any international war crimes tribunal. Nuremberg Principle I provides that “[a]ny person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.” Acts by heads of state or other government officials, even if committed in an official capacity, may not constitute an immunity defense to or mitigate criminality. These officials, therefore, could also be held responsible for offenses committed pursuant to their orders. Additionally, liability for criminal …

State Support Of International Terrorism: Legal, Political And Economic Dimensions, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece, Professor Blakesley reviews “State Support of International Terrorism: Legal, Political, and Economic Dimensions” by John F. Murphy.

The Need For An International Criminal Court In The New International World Order, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Any inquiry into the merits of an international criminal court must start with resolving three basic issues:

1. Can the tribunal improve international cooperation in law enforcement, add to the capabilities of the various nations in matters of international criminal law, or contribute in any incremental way to the solution of international and transnational criminal law problems by improving the current practice and enhancing the effectiveness of all concerned?

2. Will the recommended system have a better or equal chance of operating as effectively as the best existing systems of national criminal justice?

3. Will the recommended system improve efficiency …

Finding Harmony Amidst Disagreement Over Extradition, Jurisdiction, The Role Of Human Rights, And Issues Of Extraterritoriality Under International Criminal Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

This Article examines extradition and jurisdiction over extraterritorial crime, focusing on the relationship between jurisdiction and extradition in the broader context of human rights law. The authors challenge what they argue are chimerical, although strongly held beliefs in the incompatibility of European and United States criminal justice systems and extradition practices. They argue that cooperation in matters of international criminal law may be enhanced, while protection of human rights is promoted. The authors establish this possibility by breaking down the barriers to understanding that stem from the divergent European versus Anglo-American modes of analysis.

The authors first analyze the five …

The Modern Blood Feud: Thoughts On The Philosophy Of Terrorism, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

Herman Melville brilliantly lets us feel, through Captain Ahab, the sensation of destructive rage, hatred and violence. Sadly, Melville's insight penetrates to the core of society, perhaps of each of us, in today's omnipresent terroristic melodrama. We have all suffered moments of vicarious terror and rage over the past few years as we watched news accounts of terrorist incidents, such as the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The melodrama of terrorism has penetrated each of our lives. We see it and feel the rage nearly on a daily basis. Innocent children, women and men aboard Pan …

Major Contemporary Issues In Extradition Law, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

In this piece Professor Blakesley provides remarks on high crimes in international law, and the ability to extradite state and high government officials for committing them.

Terrorism, Law, And Our Constitutional Order, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

We have all suffered moments of vicarious terror over the past few years as we watched news accounts of terrorist incidents, such as the downing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. There, some institution, government, or group used innocent children, women, and men as fodder for their “war.” Some have claimed that the pusillanimous carnage was in retaliation for the slaughter of equivalent innocents aboard the Iranian Air Bus, similarly destroyed by American forces during the summer of 1988. Others suggested that it was committed by those interested in thwarting prospects of peace in the Middle East.

Combatting …

Jurisdiction As Legal Protection Against Terrorism, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

On June 14, 1985, Robert Stethem was shot to death aboard a hijacked TWA airliner. On October 7, 1985, the Italian cruise-liner, Achille Lauro, was hijacked and the next day Leon Klinghofer was killed and thrown overboard. On Julyu 2, 1986, Rodrgio Rojas was mortally wounded when he was doused with gasoline and set afire while walking with protesters in Santiago, Chile. Soviets are said to leave booby-trapped dolls for Afghan Moujahadeen children. There is evidence that the United States government directly supports the Nicaraguan contras who, in waging their guerilla war, allegedly have killed innocent citizens. It is …

An Essay On Executive Branch Attempts To Eviscerate The Separation Of Powers, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

The Reagan Administration has been aggressively attempting to arrogate power to the Executive branch and to undermine the separation of powers in the realms of foreign affairs. To Chain the Dog of War shows that for decades the Executive branch has moved to appropriate Congress’ war powers. The Reagan Administration not only has continued that tradition, but also has attempted to erode the Judiciary’s power to decide questions of law and fact concerning human rights and liberty in international extradition cases involving political offenses. The underlying rationale for this shift has been that decisions to make war or to condemn …

The Evisceration Of The Political Offense Exception To Extradition, Christopher L. Blakesley

Scholarly Works

The Supplementary Convention to the Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of American and the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, was signed on June 25, 1985, and transmitted to the U.S. Senate on July 17, 1985. This article will focus on the portion of the supplementary treaty which effectively eliminates the political offense exception, and on the statement made by the Legal Adviser to the Department of State, the honorable Judge Abraham D. Sofaer, made in favor of the Supplementary Treaty, on August 1, 1985. This article suggests that approval of …