Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Supreme Court Of Canada's Decision In Ezokola And The Harmonisation Of Article 1f(A) Of The Convention On The Status Of Refugees With International Criminal Law, Alan W. Freckelton
The Supreme Court Of Canada's Decision In Ezokola And The Harmonisation Of Article 1f(A) Of The Convention On The Status Of Refugees With International Criminal Law, Alan W. Freckelton
Alan W Freckelton
Canadian appellate courts have historically taken a very wide view of when there are “serious reasons to believe” that a person has committed the kinds of offences envisaged by Article 1F(a) of the Convention. In particular, they have taken the view that, in some cases at least, mere membership of a particular group is sufficient to exclude a person from protection under the Convention. However, in Ezokola v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) the Supreme Court has attempted to reconcile the requirements for responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity at international criminal law, and the requirements for exclusion under …
The Forgotten Nuremberg Hate Speech Case: Otto Dietrich And The Future Of Persecution Law, Gregory S. Gordon
The Forgotten Nuremberg Hate Speech Case: Otto Dietrich And The Future Of Persecution Law, Gregory S. Gordon
Gregory S. Gordon
Among international jurists, the conventional wisdom is that atrocity speech law sprang fully formed from two judgments issued by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (IMT): the crimes against humanity conviction of Nazi newspaper editor Julius Streicher, and the acquittal on the same charge of Third Reich Radio Division Chief Hans Fritzsche. But the exclusive focus on the IMT judgments as the founding texts of atrocity speech law is misplaced. Not long after Streicher and Fritzsche, and in the same courtroom, the United States Nuremberg Military Tribunal (NMT) in the Ministries Case, issued an equally significant crimes against …
"First, Do No Harm:" Interpreting The Crime Of Aggression To Exclude Humanitarian Intervention, Joshua L. Root
"First, Do No Harm:" Interpreting The Crime Of Aggression To Exclude Humanitarian Intervention, Joshua L. Root
Joshua L. Root
The yet to be implemented Article 8 bis of the Rome Statute criminalizes, as the crime of aggression, acts of aggression which by their “character, gravity and scale” constitute a “manifest violation” of the Charter of the United Nations. This article argues that Article 8 bis must be construed so as to exclude from the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction uses of force which are facial violations of the UN Charter but which nonetheless comport with the principles and purposes of the Charter, such as bona fide humanitarian intervention unauthorized by the Security Council. This article applies the Vienna Convention on …
Is Jus In Bello In Crisis?, Jens David Ohlin
Is Jus In Bello In Crisis?, Jens David Ohlin
Cornell Law Faculty Publications
It is a truism that new technologies are remaking the tactical and legal landscape of armed conflict. While such statements are undoubtedly true, it is important to separate genuine trends from scholarly exaggeration. The following essay, an introduction to the Drone Wars symposium of the Journal, catalogues today’s most pressing disputes regarding international humanitarian law (IHL) and their consequences for criminal responsibility. These include: (i) the triggering and classification of armed conflicts with non-state actors; (ii) the relative scope of IHL and international human rights law in asymmetrical conflicts; (iii) the targeting of suspected terrorists under concept- or status-based classifications …
The Michigan Guidelines On The Exclusion Of International Criminals
The Michigan Guidelines On The Exclusion Of International Criminals
Michigan Journal of International Law
With a view to promoting a shared understanding of the proper approach to Article 1(F)(a) exclusion from refugee status, we have engaged in sustained collaborative study and reflection on relevant norms and state practice. Our research was debated and refined at the Sixth Colloquium on Challenges in International Refugee Law, convened in March 2013 by the University of Michigan’s Program in Refugee and Asylum Law. These Guidelines are the product of that endeavor, and reflect the consensus of Colloquium participants on how decision makers can best ensure the application of Article 1(F)(a) in a manner that conforms to international legal …
Principled Exclusion: A Revised Approach To Article1(F)(A) Of The Refugee Convention, Jennifer Bond
Principled Exclusion: A Revised Approach To Article1(F)(A) Of The Refugee Convention, Jennifer Bond
Michigan Journal of International Law
The focus of this contribution is Article 1(F)(a), a section of the exclusion clause that has increased in both use and profile in recent years. Article 1(F)(a) applies to individuals who may be implicated in crimes against peace (more commonly known today as crimes of aggression), war crimes, or crimes against humanity as such crimes are defined in relevant international instruments. Where a decision maker finds that “there are serious reasons for considering that” an asylum seeker has committed one of these acts, the remainder of the Refugee Convention does not apply, and any protections to which the claimant would …