Military, War, and Peace Commons^™

Sexual Assault And Rape In The Military: The Invisible Victims Of International Gender Crimes At The Front Lines, Stella Cernak

Michigan Journal of Gender & Law

In the past several years in particular, intra-military sexual assault and rape in the U.S. armed forces have been the focus of frequent media attention and intense congressional debate. Despite reforms, the rate of intra-military sexual crimes continues to remain high, as does soldiers’ wariness to report instances of sexual violence to military commanders. These problems and others have invigorated the position taken by some that outside judicial review of intra- military sexual crimes is necessary to provide justice to victims and lower the rate of intra-military sexual assault and rape. This Note argues that one of the primary contributors …

Military Tribunals And Due Process In Post-Revolutionary Egypt, Bianca C. Isaias

The International Lawyer

No abstract provided.

Is Military Justice Sentencing On The March? Should It Be? And If So, Where Should It Head? Court-Martial Sentencing Process, Practice, And Issues, James E. Baker

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article starts with a sketch of the military justice system to orient readers. Understanding that structure, the article then describes the sentencing process for special and general courts-martial. The article follows by identifying two core military sentencing questions: First, should commanders have authority to grant clemency? Second, should the military justice system adopt sentencing guidelines? With respect to each topic presented, the article does not attempt to answer the questions nor offer prescriptions. Rather, it seeks to identify the principal fault lines around which debate should, or will likely, fall. The article next presents ‘‘nutshell’’ introductions to additional sentencing …

The Role Of The Courts In Time Of War, William C. Banks

Washington and Lee Law Review Online

The role of the courts in judging the actions of government in wartime has ranged from extreme deference to careful probing of alleged government excesses over more than two centuries. The courts’ record has reflected the nature of the armed conflicts the United States has engaged in and the legal bases for the actions at issue. In the aggregate, the courts have served as a necessary counterweight to government overreaching in times of national security crisis. It is easy to underestimate the institutional problems confronting judges who are asked to make momentous decisions in times of national crisis—difficulties of fact-finding …

Genocide Treaty - Ethnic Cleansing - Substantive And Procedural Hurdles In The Application Of The Genocide Convention To Alleged Crimes In The Former Yugoslavia, John Webb

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Democracy's Struggle Against Terrorism: The Powers Of Military Commanders To Decide Upon The Demolition Of Houses, The Imposition Of Curfews, Blockades, Encirclements And The Declaration Of An Area As A Closed Military Area, Emanuel Gross

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Politics Of Justice: Why Israel Signed The International Criminal Court Statute And What The Signature Means, Daniel A. Blumenthal

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Remaking The Pen Mightier Than The Sword: An Evaluation Of The Growing Need For The International Protection Of Journalists, Dylan Howard

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Advisory Opinion On The Legality Of The Threat Or Use Of Nuclear Weapons, Stefaan Smis, Kim Van Der Borght

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

A Cautionary Tale: Examining The Use Of Military Tribunals By The United States In The Aftermath Of The September 11 Attacks In Light Of Peru's History Of Human Rights Abuses Resulting From Similar Measures, Jim Davis

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Vladimir Putin And The Rule Of Law In Russia, Jeffrey Kahn

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Restrictions On Humanitarian Aid In Darfur: The Role Of The International Criminal Court, Mominah Usmani

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

Targeted Killing: United States Policy, Constitional Law, And Due Process, Mark Febrizio

Senior Honors Theses

The increased incorporation of targeted killing, primarily through the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, into United States policy raises salient questions regarding its consistency with the U.S. Constitution. This paper contrasts interpretations of constitutional due process with the current legal framework for conducting targeted killing operations. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution establishes the due process owed to U.S. citizens. This paper determines that the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, was accomplished in a manner inconsistent with constitutional due process and demonstrates an over-extension of executive branch power. This paper examines one scholarly recommendation that seeks to increase …

Safeguarding The Commander's Authority To Review The Findings Of A Court-Martial, Andrew S. Williams

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

There are many good reasons why the military justice system is different than the civilian system. Much deserves to be said about why commanders must retain oversight and control over the court-martial process. The purpose of this paper is more limited in scope. It is to demonstrate that a court-martial panel is not a true jury and that the commander should retain the authority to review its findings for this reason alone.

Experiments In International Criminal Justice: Lessons From The Khmer Rouge Tribunal, John D. Ciorciari, Anne Heindel

Michigan Journal of International Law

Important experiments in international criminal justice have been taking place at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC or Court), a tribunal created by the United Nations and Cambodian Government to adjudicate some of the most egregious crimes of the Pol Pot era.2 The tribunal opened its doors in 2006, and although its work continues, its first seven years of operations provide an opportunity to evaluate its performance and judge the extent to which legal and institutional experiments at the ECCC have been successful to date. This Article will show that, in general, the ECCC’s most unique and …

The Effects Of The Lubanga Case On Understanding And Preventing Child Soldiering, Mark A. Drumbl

Scholarly Articles

On March 14, 2012, a trial chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) convicted Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, a rebel leader from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, for child-soldier-related crimes. Some months later, Lubanga was sentenced to a prison term of fourteen years. On August 7, 2012, an ICC trial chamber issued its decision regarding the principles and procedures to be applied to reparations in the Lubanga case. This Article unpacks the relationships between the Lubanga proceedings and how the international community conceptualizes, and strives to prevent, child soldiering. This Article contends that the Lubanga proceedings reinforce, and incubate, a …

Contemporary Practice Of The United States Relating To International Law, July 2014, Kristina Daugirdas, Julian Davis Mortenson

Articles

United States Negotiates Prisoner Exchange to Secure Release of U.S. Soldier Held in Afghanistan • United States Refuses to Grant Visa to Iranian UN Envoy • Multilateral Naval Code of Conduct Aims to Prevent Unintended Conflict in Contested Areas of East and South China Seas • Senate Approves Treaties to Regulate Fishing • United States Indicts Chinese Military Officials for Economic Espionage • U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Terminate Long-Running Efforts to Force Argentina to Pay Defaulted Sovereign Debt • United States Condemns Uganda’s Antigay Law as Violating Human Rights • President Barack Obama Certifies That U.S. Peacekeepers in Mali …

The Voice Of Reason—Why Recent Judicial Interpretations Of The Antiterrorism And Effective Death Penalty Act’S Restrictions On Habeas Corpus Are Wrong, Judith L. Ritter

Seattle University Law Review

By filing a petition for a federal writ of habeas corpus, a prisoner initiates a legal proceeding collateral to the direct appeals process. Federal statutes set forth the procedure and parameters of habeas corpus review. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) first signed into law by President Clinton in 1996, included significant cut-backs in the availability of federal writs of habeas corpus. This was by congressional design. Yet, despite the dire predictions, for most of the first decade of AEDPA’s reign, the door to habeas relief remained open. More recently, however, the Supreme Court reinterpreted a key portion …

The Administrative Procedure Act And The Military Departments, Thomas R. Folk

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Not Quite A Civilian, Not Quite A Soldier: How Five Words Could Subject Civilian Contractors In Iraq And Afghanistan To Military Jurisdiction , Katherine Jackson

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Feres Doctrine: "Don't Let This Be It. Fight!", 46 J. Marshall L. Rev. 607 (2013), Jennifer Zyznar

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fairness And Politics At The Icty: Evidence From The Indictments, 39 N.C. J. Int'l L. & Com. Reg. 45 (2013), Stuart K. Ford

UIC Law Open Access Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Crashing The Misdemeanor System, Jenny M. Roberts

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

With “minor crimes” making up more than 75% of state criminal caseloads, the United States faces a misdemeanor crisis. Although mass incarceration continues to plague the nation, the current criminal justice system is faltering under the weight of misdemeanor processing.

Operating under the “broken windows theory,” which claims that public order law enforcement prevents more serious crime, the police send many petty offenses to criminal court. This is so even though the original authors of the theory noted that “[o]rdinarily, no judge or jury ever sees the persons caught up in a dispute over the appropriate level of neighborhood order” …

Contested States And The Rights And Obligations Of The Jus Ad Bellum, Christian Henderson

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article examines the rights and obligations of contested states under the jus ad bellum, arguing that these entities, despite lacking widespread recognition as states, should be considered international legal persons. It challenges the traditional state-only conception of international personality and advocates for a recognition-based approach, which would extend the prohibition of the use of force and the right to self-defense to contested states. The analysis highlights the complexities and contradictions in applying these principles, particularly regarding collective self-defense, and suggests that a pragmatic interpretation could balance international peace and security with the legal protection of contested states.

‘Germans Are The Lords And Poles Are The Servants’: The Trial Of Arthur Greiser In Poland, 1946, In The Hidden Histories Of War Crimes Trials (Kevin Jon Heller & Gerry Simpson Eds., 2013), Mark A. Drumbl

Books and Chapters

In the aftermath of World War II, the first conviction of an influential Nazi German official for the crime of waging aggressive war was delivered not by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, but, rather, by the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland sitting in Poznán. The accused was Arthur Greiser. Beginning in September 1939, Greiser served as Gauleiter (i.e. Governor) of the Warthegau, a large expanse of western Poland that had been illegally annexed to Nazi Germany. The Warthegau's residents suffered brutally under Greiser's boot.

The Polish Tribunal sentenced Greiser to death on July 9, 1946. His execution by public …

Methods Of Compensating Victims Of War: Combating The Problems Of An Enduring System, Bryan S. Hance

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Icc Prosecutor V. President Medema: Simulated Proceedings Before The International Criminal Court , Pieter H. F. Bekker, David Stoelting

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

On July 18, 2000, as part of the Annual Meeting of the American Bar Association, an all star cast of American and English lawyers gathered in the Common Room of the Law Society of England and Wales in London to simulate oral argument before the International Criminal Court ("ICC"). The fictitious proceedings involved a head of state, President Luis Medema, charged with genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The prosecutors and defense counsel engaged in lively oral argument before the Trial Chamber in the context of three critical issues: (1) jurisdiction of the ICC over citizens of non-state parties; …

The Separation Of Powers: Hamdan V. Rumsfeld - The Anti-Roberts, Douglas W. Kmiec

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Gacaca Experiment: Rwanda's Restorative Dispute Resolution Response To The 1994 Genocide, Jessica Raper

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

Since its rise to power in July of 1994, the Rwandan government has been committed to prosecuting all those accused of genocide. To prosecute the approximately 130,000 defendants, Rwanda has adopted a program called gacaca, based on Rwanda's traditional customary dispute resolution system. The gacaca law provides a reconciliation component that allows defendants to trade confessions of past genocide crimes for indemnification, as well as a prosecution component that holds the most serious offenders accountable in a Western style prosecution in a formal court of law. One of the main goals of gacaca is to end the so-called "culture …

The Assault Of Jamie Leigh Jones: How One Woman's Horror Story Is Changing Arbitration In America, Jeffrey Adams

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

This article examines Jones v. Halliburton Co., the "Al Franken Amendment" to the 2010 U.S. Defense Department Budget (Franken Amendment) that was created in response to Jones, and the impact that both could have on mandatory arbitration clauses in employment contracts in the future. Part II recounts the troubling events that led to Jones and the inclusion of the Franken Amendment in the 2010 Defense Department Budget. Part III details the arguments made for and against the inclusion of the Franken Amendment. Part IV analyzes the impact that the Franken Amendment could have on mandatory arbitration clauses in contacts in …