Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Interest-Balancing Vs. Fiduciary Duty: Two Models For National Security Law, Evan Fox-Decent, Evan J. Criddle
Interest-Balancing Vs. Fiduciary Duty: Two Models For National Security Law, Evan Fox-Decent, Evan J. Criddle
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Human Rights, Emergencies, And The Rule Of Law, Evan J. Criddle, Evan Fox-Decent
Human Rights, Emergencies, And The Rule Of Law, Evan J. Criddle, Evan Fox-Decent
Faculty Publications
This article illuminates the normative basis for international law’s regulation of public emergencies by arguing that human rights are best conceived as norms arising from a fiduciary relationship between states (or state-like actors) and persons subject to their power. States bear a fiduciary duty to guarantee subjects’ secure and equal freedom, a duty that flows from their institutional assumption of sovereign powers. The fiduciary theory disarms Carl Schmitt’s critique of constitutionalism by explaining how emergency powers can be reconciled with the rule of law.
Proportionality In Counterinsurgency: A Relational Theory, Evan J. Criddle
Proportionality In Counterinsurgency: A Relational Theory, Evan J. Criddle
Faculty Publications
At a time when the United States has undertaken high-stakes counterinsurgency campaigns in at least three countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan) while offering support to insurgents in a fourth (Libya), it is striking that the international legal standards governing the use of force in counterinsurgency remain unsettled and deeply controversial. Some authorities have endorsed norms from international humanitarian law as lex specialis, while others have emphasized international human rights as minimum standards of care for counterinsurgency operations. This Article addresses the growing friction between international human rights and humanitarian law in counterinsurgency by developing a relational theory of the use …