Monday, October 24, 2011

What Kind Of Day Has It Been

International

Domestic

The Short List - October 24, 2011

International
Domestic

Friday, October 21, 2011

The Short List - October 21, 2011

International

Domestic

Thursday, October 20, 2011

The Killing of Qaddafi, War Crime

Al-Jazeera English has obtained video showing Qaddafi alive at the time of his capture. Qaddafi is clearly disoriented and bleeding from his head. Although this blog--and this Editor in particular--has been consistently supportive of the NTC and NATO's involvement in the Libyan revolution, that Qaddafi was killed shortly after strikes this Editor as a war crime. 

As Article 3 Common to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 states:
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
(2) The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for.

(emphasis added). Qaddafi was apparently killed after he was rendered hors de combat by both capture and, apparently, injury. That is murder--and likely a war crime. His body was then taken to Misurata and dragged through its streets. That is mutilation--and also likely a war crime. 


It is important to remember that this sort of conflict--a civil war--is exactly the type of conflict in the minds of the drafters when they wrote Common Article 3. It is important to remember it is triggered when there is an armed conflict in the territory of a High Contracting Party; it does not matter that the NTC is only a nascent government and not a well-established state, nor does it matter that the NTC was not the government of Libya when Libya ratified the Geneva Conventions. They are bound by it under the law of state succession. Moreover, the Geneva Conventions are jus cogens and would apply even if Libya weren't a High Contracting Party. 


UPDATE: A colleague points out that we do not know whether Qaddafi was killed after that footage or whether he succumb to his wounds. This is an excellent point. If he merely succumb to his wounds, then there was no murder. However, mutilation still stands.

The Short List - October 20, 2011

International
Domestic

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

What Kind Of Day Has It Been

International

Domestic

The Short List - October 19, 2011

International




Domestic

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

What Kind Of Day Has It Been

International

Domestic

Live Blogging the GOP Debate

Ben and I will be live blogging the Western Republican Presidential Debate tonight at 8pm ET.  Check back in then to see what we think of what the candidates think.


The Short List - October 18, 2011

International

Domestic

Monday, October 17, 2011

What Kind Of Day Has It Been

International

Domestic

The Short List - October 17, 2011

International

Domestic

Friday, October 14, 2011

The Short List - October 14, 2011

International
Domestic

Thursday, October 13, 2011

The Short List - October 13, 2011

International

Domestic

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

What Kind Of Day Has It Been

International
  • NTC forces press the attack in Sirte and Reuters captures this stunning footage:

Domestic



An Anecdotal Comparison of Efficient Judicial Systems

  • Khalid Sheik Mohammed - captured on March 1, 2003, and still not prosecuted as of October 12, 2011.
  • Umar Farouk Abdulmutalla - captured on December 25, 2009, charged, arraigned, and plead guilty as of October 12, 2011.


Who says Military Commissions are more effective?

The Short List - October 12, 2011

International

Domestic

Tuesday, October 11, 2011

What Kind Of Day Has It Been

International

Domestic

The Short List - October 11, 2011

International

Domestic

Monday, October 10, 2011

The Short List - October 10, 2011

International

Domestic

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Legal Justifications for Killing Anwar al-Aulaqi

Charlie Savage has a tantalizing report in the NewYork Times describing, based on sources familiar with the document, the contents of the Justice Department’s memorandum analyzing and authorizing the targeted killing of Anwar al-Aulaqi. Without access to the memorandum itself, it is impossible to provide a detailed analysis of its reasoning. However, some of the New York Times report hint at some interesting developments.

First, Savage reports that
[t]he legal analysis, in essence, concluded that Mr. Awlaki could be legally killed, if it was not feasible to capture him, because intelligence agencies said he was taking part in the war between the United States and Al Qaeda and posed a significant threat to Americans, as well as because Yemeni authorities were unable or unwilling to stop him.
Here, we see the continuing mixing of self-defense and armed conflict. The requirements of self-defense are apparent in that al-Aulaqi “posed a significant threat to Americans, as well as because Yemeni authorities were unable or unwilling to stop him.” This would seem to address the necessity requirement of self-defense. Further, we see that the memo, according to Savage’s sources, asserted the existence of war—let us presume it actually said “armed conflict”—and that al-Aulaqi was targetable because “he was taking part in the war”; that is, he was a civilian directly participating in hostilities.

Second, Savage reports that
[o]ther assertions about Mr. Awlaki included that he was a leader of the group, which had become a “cobelligerent” with Al Qaeda, and he was pushing it to focus on trying to attack the United States again. The lawyers were also told that capturing him alive among hostile armed allies might not be feasible if and when he were located.
Here, we have the first suggestion that the United States recognizes AQAP as a cobelligerent of Al Qaeda. This is fascinating for two reasons: 1. it indicates that the U.S. recognizes that AQ and AQAP are distinct organizations and that the Al Qaeda “franchise” is not monolithic; 2. more interestingly, it suggests that the United States is taking the position that cobelligerency, a status found historically only in international armed conflict (armed conflicts between states) can now occur in non-international armed conflicts (armed conflicts between states and non-state actors, or among non-state actors). Both myself and Jack Goldsmith have made arguments that this cross-pollination should occur.

Finally, Savage reports this:
would it comply with the laws of war if the drone operator who fired the missile was a Central Intelligence Agency official, who, unlike a soldier, wore no uniform? The memorandum concluded that such a case would not be a war crime, although the operator might be in theoretical jeopardy of being prosecuted in a Yemeni court for violating Yemen’s domestic laws against murder, a highly unlikely possibility.
This is incredibly interesting—both to me because of other work I’ve done—and in light of the fact that the United States is currently charging Guantanamo detainees, categorized as unprivileged belligerents, with “murder in violation of the laws of war.” At least in so far as the Military Commission prosecutions are concerned, the United States seems to take the position that a civilian who directly participates in hostilities, and kills even a lawful target, commits murder in violation of the laws of war. Putting aside the fact that there is no support for this position in international law, the Justice Department seems to be taking the opposite position!

All in all, Savage’s article is a trove of information but should serve merely to underscore the necessity of the United States releasing its legal reasoning undergirding the targeted killing of Anwar al-Aulaqi, and others.