Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
When Is A War Not A War? The Myth Of The Global War On Terror, Mary Ellen O'Connell
When Is A War Not A War? The Myth Of The Global War On Terror, Mary Ellen O'Connell
Journal Articles
It is essential to correctly classify situations in the world as ones of war or peace: human lives depend on the distinction, but so do liberty, property, and the integrity of the natural environment. President Bush's war on terror finds war where suspected members of al Qaeda are found. By contrast, war under international law exists where hostilities are on-going. To the extent there is ambiguity, the United States should err on the side of pursuing terrorists within the peacetime criminal law enforcement paradigm, not a wartime one. Not only does the criminal law better protect important human rights and …
Enhancing The Status Of Non-State Actors Through A Global War On Terror?, Mary Ellen O'Connell
Enhancing The Status Of Non-State Actors Through A Global War On Terror?, Mary Ellen O'Connell
Journal Articles
Soon after September 11, President Bush declared a global war on terrorism and members of terrorist groups "combatants." These declarations are not only generally inconsistent with international law; they also reverse the trend regarding the legal status of international non-state actors. For decades, law-abiding non-state actors, such as international humanitarian aid organizations, enjoyed ever-expanding rights on the international plane. Professor Schachter observed how this trend came at the expense of the nation-state. He also predicted, however, that the nation-state would not fade away any time soon. And, by the late Twentieth Century, the trend toward enhanced status was noticeably slowing. …
Affirming The Ban On Harsh Interrogation, Mary Ellen O'Connell
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 …