Using Legal Process to Fight Terrorism: Detentions, Military Commissions, International Tribunals, and the Rule of Law
South Carolina Law Review, Vol. 75, p. 1407, 2002
86 Pages Posted: 29 May 2009
Date Written: 2002
Abstract
Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, those arguing that international law cannot serve as an effective tool in the fight against terrorism have grown. The ranks of international relations realists, who view international law primarily as a cover for strategic interests and thereby as lacking any independent bite, has swelled. In November 2001, President Bush issued an executive order asserting the authority to use military commissions to try individual terrorism suspects captured by the United States. Such commissions would be conducted unilaterally and would not be required to include procedural safeguards to protect the rights of the accused.
This crisis has forced us to revisit the question of what the rule of law gets us as a nation and as a people. This article argues that the Administration's treatment of detainees and the military commissions run counter to the rule of law - both domestically, by violating American constitutional protections, and internationally, by flouting established principles of international law. Far from being a straight-jacket that threatens our security, respect for legal process values and international law, will actually best serve our long-term strategic interests in containing terrorism. This article also considers how an international tribunal process could be initiated expeditiously and two alternative "quasi-international" models that have received insufficient consideration thus far. The law skeptics' perspective is also addressed at a more theoretical level, offering some tentative observations about the importance of fair adjudicatory processes despite the fact that societies are always to some degree riven by conflict.
Keywords: terrorism, international law, international tribunals
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
International Judicial Independence
By Erik Voeten
-
Reversing Field: What Can International Relations Learn from International Law?
By Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack
-
Persuading to Comply: On the Deployment and Avoidance of Legal Argumentation
-
Constructivism and International Law
By Jutta Brunnée and Stephen J. Toope
-
Law, Legalization and Politics: An Agenda for the Next Generation of IR-IL Scholars
By Kenneth W. Abbott and Duncan Snidal
-
International Law and International Relations: Introducing an Interdisciplinary Dialogue
By Jeffrey L. Dunoff and Mark A. Pollack
-
Courts, Tribunals, and Legal Unification - the Agency Problem
-
Judicial Tactics in the European Court of Human Rights
By Shai Dothan
-
Misusing International Sources to Interpret the Constitution
-
Clash of Paradigms: Actors and Analogies Shaping the Investment Treaty System