Law | Open Access Articles | Digital Commons Network™

Animating The U.S. War Crimes Act, Beth Van Schaack

International Law Studies

All war crimes are challenging to prosecute. Typical reasons include the technicality of some constitutive elements, the difficulties of amassing sufficient evidence, the vagaries of unreliable or unavailable witnesses, and the often-impenetrable khaki wall of silence. Adding to these challenges, the United States has erected a number of idiosyncratic structural barriers in the way in which it has incorporated the prohibitions against war crimes into its domestic legal frameworks, both military and civilian. This article addresses problems with the U.S. federal war crimes statute and proposes reforms that would (1) better conform to U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions and …

Go to article

U.S. Recognition Of A Commander’S Duty To Punish War Crimes, Brian Finucane

International Law Studies

This article explores the United States' recognition of the doctrine of command responsibility. The doctrine has been invoked by those alleging that President Trump’s pardons of U.S. personnel convicted or accused of war crimes could amount to war crimes themselves. The article focuses on a commander’s duty to punish war crimes by his subordinates. It examines the United States’ past recognition of the duty to punish as an element of command responsibility under the law of war. The principle that a commander has an obligation to punish war crimes by his subordinates is not a progressive development of the law …

Go to article

Detention By Armed Groups Under International Law, Andrew Clapham

International Law Studies

Does international law entitle armed groups to detain people? And what obligations are imposed on such non-state actors when they do detain? This article sets out suggested obligations for armed groups related to the right to challenge the basis for any detention and considers some related issues of fair trial and punishment. The last part of this article briefly considers the legal framework governing state responsibility and individual criminal responsibility for those that assist armed groups that detain people in ways that violate international law.

Go to article

The Combatant’S Stance: Autonomous Weapons On The Battlefield, Jens David Ohlin

International Law Studies

Do Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) qualify as moral or rational agents? This paper argues that combatants on the battlefield are required by the demands of behavior interpretation to approach a sophisticated AWS with the “Combatant’s Stance”—the ascription of mental states required to understand the system’s strategic behavior on the battlefield. However, the fact that an AWS must be engaged with the combatant’s stance does not entail that other persons are relieved of criminal or moral responsibility for war crimes committed by autonomous weapons. This article argues that military commanders can and should be held responsible for perpetrating war crimes through …

Go to article