International Criminal Law in the News

The last two weeks have seen a number of developments in international criminal law. The tribunal of former Khemer Rouge leaders unfolded in Cambodia (for those who are interested in the underlying issues, the movie Killing Fields is set in Cambodia of that era); the former President of the Cote d'Ivoire arrived in the Hague to face charges in the ICC; meanwhile a tribunal began hearings in Bangladesh into charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the 1971 war of secession, but has come under heavy criticism for its apparent bias. In Kenya a court issued an arrest warrant for the Bashir, the president of Sudan, who has been indicted for crimes against humanity by the ICC.

Talk on Cuba at WU

Bob Beatty: "Cuba in 2011: Alive, but Standing Still"

 November 30, Noon, International House

 Communist Cuba still holds on, even with the decades-long American economic and travel embargo still firmly in place. With the succession of leadership from Fidel Castro to his brother Raoul Castro and promised economic changes - along with the change from President Bush to Obama - is Cuba coming out of its time warp?

Dr. Bob Beatty of the Washburn University Political Science Department traveled to Cuba last February to find out, and will explain why he does not see much cause for optimism.

Int'l Criminal Law in the News

[updated below] As you all will likely have heard, Col. Qaddafi's son and heir was captured by militia forces in Libya late this week. The Libyan government has suggested that he will be turned over to the International Criminal Court for prosecution, for crimes against humanity among other things, and the Chief Prosecutor is headed to Libya to begin discussions towards that end. Today however, the militia that is holding him is reported to be resisting calls to surrender him to the government.

Meanwhile, also this week, a former Mayor of a town in Rwanda was convicted by the ICTR for genocide and crimes against humanity, for his part in the killing of some 6,000 Tutsis in the Rwanda genocide of 1994.

On another continent, the U.N.-established tribunal to try crimes of genocide in Cambodia announced this week that the trial against Pol Pot's sister-in-law would not proceed, as she is unfit to stand trial. The tribunal has run into difficulty in the last few months due to reports of government interference in the tribunal's process.

[update] In line with the necessity that the administration of international criminal law is consistent with fundamental human rights and the rule of law, consider this editorial in The New York Times regarding the determination of habeus applications of detainees in GITMO, who are being held in large part on reasons grounded in international law principles.

Earlier this year, The Guardian reviewed the extent to which threats of possible arrest and prosecution have impacted on the travel plans of George W. Bush, Rumsfeld, and others, for among other things the treatment of detainees in GITMO.

Readings - Int'l Criminal Law

We will wrap up use of force this week, and will likely begin our examination of international criminal law on Friday. For that purpose, you should focus on the following material:

In Chap. 15, Sec. 4(A) - intro, 1 and 2 (pp. 1276-1287);

Chap. 16, Sec. 1, Sec. 2, Sec. 3(A)-(C); and Sec. 4(A)-(B up to p.1360). You may also be interested in reviewing Section 4(C), which is on the U.S. position regarding the ICC.

Waterboarding and Torture

[updated below] The torture debate has erupted once again onto the American political scene. Today's New York Times has an editorial excoriating several of the Republican candidates who, in the most recent debate, endorsed the use of waterboarding for the purposes of interrogation.

Is waterboarding consistent with the U.S.A.'s international legal obligations? How would you go about analyzing the issue? Please provide your thoughts in the comments function below.

[update] For those of you who attended Sam McCohan's talk on GITMO and enhanced interrogation techniques today at lunchtime, the Levin report that he referred to, being a report of the Senate Armed Services Committee chaired by Senator Levin on the treatment of detainees, can be found here, and an executive summary and conclusions of the report, released earlier, can be found here.  

Iraq War Debate

As mentioned in class, here is the Memo of the Attorney General for the United Kingdom, providing his legal opinion on the legality of an invasion of Iraq, provided to the Prime Minister just prior to the war.

For those who are interested, you can spend several hours watching the testimony of not only Lord Goldsmith, but other members of cabinet, in the subsequent inquiry into the decision to invade Iraq.

In preparing for the debate you might also want to look at the full text of UN Security Council resolutions 678, 687, and 1441, which you can access through the links on the right.

Why Do Nations Obey International Law?

Further to our discussion in class regarding the question of whether international law matters, and the frustration some of you have expressed over the apparent lack of definitive institutional action in the face of illegality, I would suggest taking a little time to review the short article by Harold Koh, entitled "Why Do Nations Obey International Law?". It is an outstanding review of the different theories of compliance, and should help you develop an understanding of the more nuanced and sophisticated ways in which international law can mobilize obedience, even in the absence of judicial sanction.

Documentary on Campus

The award winning documentary "For the Bible Tells Me So", which explores the tension between religious groups and the equality rights of members of the gay and lesbian community, will be screened on campus next week, Wednesday November 16, at 12:00, in the Kansas Room in the Memorial Union. There will also be a "faith panel" of local religious leaders to discuss the same issue the following evening, same place, at 18:00 hrs. While not about international law per se, the equality rights of homosexuals, and the manner in which religious groups have worked to deny recognition and protection of those rights in various countries and within international organisations, is a very live issue within the domain of international human rights law.

Israel Contemplating Military Strikes Against Iran

There is considerable news this week on comments made by members of the Israeli cabinet regarding the possibility of Israeli military strikes against Iran to prevent its development of nuclear weapons. Several world leaders have attempted to calm the waters. The issue is likely to be further exacerbated by the report today from the IAEA that there is credible evidence that Iran is attempting to develop nuclear weapons.

Do you think that such a strike could be justified? If so, under what principles? What is the legal basis for even preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons? Would that basis provide a justification for the use of force?

Definition of Aggression

For those interested in reading more about the definition of aggression, for the purposes of the Rome Statute of the ICC, which was decided upon at the international conference at Kampala last year, there is a good article on the subject at EJIL: Talk! As discussed in the blog post, the new definition and associated "understandings" raise many interesting issues involving treaty interpretation.

The definition itself is as follows:For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

Readings - Use of Force

Continuing our examination of use of force in Chapter 15, you should focus your reading on the following sections:

Continuing in Section 1 (C),
(5), the Schachter Article;
(6)(a) the Nicaragua v. USA case, Schachter piece, and notes;
    (b) the Schachter piece on preemptive use of force;
    (d) self-defense against non-state actors;
Section 2
Intro and (A);
(B) (focus on Schachter piece)
(C)
Section 3
(A) (we will spend considerable time on this section)

In addition, please review the highlighted and redacted copy of the ICJ's judgment in the Oil Platforms Case (Iran v. U.S.A.), which can be downloaded here. Should you want to put the redacted portion into context, remember that you can download summaries of the judgments at the ICJ website.

You may also want to look at the full text of UN General Assembly Resolutions 2626 (Declaration on Friendly Relations), and 3314 (Definition of Aggression).

JAG Conference

Further to the announcement in class today, here is a link to the JAG Conference Agenda, for the conference this weekend.

In the News

[updated] This week a notorious arms dealer, who was the basis for the Nicholas Cage character in the movie Lord of War, was convicted for conspiracy to kill Americans, providing material support for terrorists, and trading in arms, in a Federal Court in New York. A Russian national, he was captured in Thailand and extradited to the US over Russian objections, for actions taken outside of the US. To what extent is this extra-territorial application of prescriptive and adjudicative jurisdiction consistent with international law principles?

In other news today, another flotilla has left Turkey en-route to Gaza, challenging once again the Israeli "blockade". And also in the context of use of force, the subject we will be taking up on Friday, you should all be following the events surrounding the foray by Kenyan armed forces into Somalia.

In late breaking news, the Supreme Court of Canada today refused leave to appeal in a case involving the extradition of an "admitted" terrorist to the U.S. for trial. The lower courts had found that while there were sufficient grounds for extradition of Abdullah Khadr (elder brother of the more famous Omar Khadr who is in GITMO) to the U.S., the "shocking" violation by the U.S. of his rights under international law while he was detained in Pakistan militated against extradition, as it would reward the U.S. for its violation of international law.

Human Rights Committee Observations re USA

Above is an example of a Human Rights Committee observations in response to a state's periodic report, which each state submits pursuant to its obligations under the ICCPR. The Third Periodic Report of the United States of America, to which this document is a response, can be found here.Consider whether such reporting, and resulting response from the Human Rights Committee, is effective as a mechanism for mobilizing compliance with state obligations.

Wednesday's Class

On Wednesday we will wrap up our discussion of human rights. We will very quickly review the different international human rights treaty regimes (the regional regimes, CEDAW, CERD), and then spend more time examining the operation of the ICCPR and the Human Rights Committee. In preparation for this discussion you should pay particular attention to Section 4, and the US Reservations to the ICCPR and the Human Rights Committee's comment, and the U.S. response. We will examine, in the context of the Human Rights Committee's work, the Lovelace case.

Then, look at Section 4(D), the US position on the extra-territorial application of the ICCPR, and consider in that context  the Al Skeini case we looked at last week.

Finally, we will examine the derogation from rights obligations in times of emergency, looking at the Lawless case, and the excerpt from A(F.C.) v. The Home Secretary. [see the Human Rights Committee case post below, for excerpts from and link to the case]

Readings - Use of Force

Following human rights, we will be turning to Use of Force, in Chapter 15. We will spend at least four classes on Use of Force.

For Friday's class, please read up to the end of the section on the Cuban Missile Crisis, on page 1161.  

Human Rights Committee case.

This week, Monday and Wednesday will be devoted to completing our examination of human rights. In that vein, in addition to the readings listed here last week, please take a look at the attached opinion of the Human Rights Committee in response to an individual claim against Canada, pursuant to the Optional Protocol of the ICCPR. We will consider this case for a number of reasons - it illustrates the mechanism of individual claims, and is an example of a Human Rights Committee communication (in contrast to an ECHR decision); it is also yet another example of a human rights claim to which we can apply the analytic framework we have been discussing for assessing rights violations. The case is only 12 pages long, and it is already highlighted.

As discussed last class, tomorrow we will try to apply our rights analysis to the issue of same sex marriage. This is more of an exercise in thinking through how the analysis is applied, but you might consider the issue in the context of Articles 26 and 23 of the ICCPR. (see more below the fold)

Restrictions on Religious Practice in Europe

As we continue to consider the Shahin case in class, consider these much broader bans on the wearing of the niqab and the burqa in France (more on it here, and here), Italy, and elsewhere in Europe. Similarly, in 2009, the Swiss voted to ban the building of minarets (the church-tower of Mosques), and this year France began a move to ban the practice of public prayer. All of this has been criticized as being motivated by anti-Islamic prejudice, but in any event these restrictions will likely come before the ECHR as violations of Art. 9 of the Convention. 

Consider how you would analyze each of these limits in light of our examination of the Sahin case.

Human Rights Readings

Next week we will turn to consider human rights. In Chapter 13, you should focus your reading on the following sections:

All of Section 1, with particular attention to Sahin v. Turkey;
All of Section 2, (and you should look at the ICCPR and CEDAW online);
Section 3, A-C, but with emphasis on B.
Section 4, B, C (Lawless case); D (and consider Al-Skeini in this context);
Section 5, skim.

Al Skeini v. Secretary of State for Defence

Hazim Al-Skeini

As mentioned in class today, the European Court of Human Rights in July of this year handed down a judgment with respect to the same case that we examined today, the House of Lords decision in Al-Skeini v. Secretary of State for Defence, holding that the Iraqi nationals could make claims under the Convention, and finding that the UK had, among other things, violated the claimants' Art. 2 right to life. There is a summary and commentary on the judgment on the Lawfare blog here, and the decision itself is here.

If you have time to scan the decision, consider whether you still think that the House of Lords got it right (or wrong), and which decision you think better accords with international law principles on jurisdiction, and the rationale underlying those principles.

The Power of Compound Interest

Further to our discussion of damages and costs in litigation, and the difference between compound and simple interest, here is a link to a spreadsheet that illustrates the power of compound interest. It includes the formulas you can use to calculate straight-forward compound interest.

Important to note is that an investment of $15,000 in an account earning compound interest, calculated and paid monthly, at a rate of 6% per annum, will earn $31,653.07 more in interest, than an account earning simple interest at the same rate over the same period.

Compound interest is even more powerful when the principal is increasing with each period. So, if you took $2 each week (the amount you might be tempted to spend on lottery tickets), and invested it in an account earning 6% per annum compounded monthly (admittedly impossible to find in the current environment), at the end of 40 years your account (in which you would have only invested $4,160 over the 40 years) would be worth $15,953, or close to four times your investment. Make that $20 instead of $2, and the amounts become more interesting.

You can find a straight compound interest calculator here, and one which includes the addition of monthly contributions to principal  here.

Readings - State Responsibility and Dispute Resolution

Next week we will finish up our examination of State Responsibility. We will in particular at the Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia); and then Reparations (Section 5) and Countermeasures (Section 6). We will not review the procedural aspects in Sections 7 & 8.

We will then turn to Dispute Settlement in Chapter 9. As mentioned in class, we will go through this quite quickly, and so will not be examining all the material in the chapter. In particular, you should review: All of Section 1; just skim Section 2 (just familiarize yourself with the different mechanisms); Section 3(A); Section 4(intro and part of (A) (just p. 586-596), and (B) (just p.624-628); Section 5, Intro and (A).

By Friday we will begin consideration of the Bases of Jurisdiction (Chap. 11) and Immunity (Chap. 12). We will cover these topics very briefly. In Chap. 11, review Section 1; Section 2, Intro, (B) (p.769-776); Section 4; Section 5 (p.798-802); Section 6 (p. 804-810); Section 7, Intro; Section 8, (p. 818-825). Section 11(A).

On Immunity, in Chap. 12, review Section 1; Section 2(A)(p. 860-64); (E); (G); Section 4(A)(p.916-20); (B)(p.924-29).

The following week we launch into the substantive area of human rights!

Documentary at WU This Thursday

The acclaimed documentary "The Dark Side of Chocolate" will be screened at Henderson Hall, Room 100, this Thursday, Oct. 13, at 7:00. There are, of course, human rights issues raised by the film.

Recent Int'l Law Topics in the News

Syria this week warned other countries against recognizing the Syrian National Council, an opposition group formed to challenge the legitimacy of the Assad regime. To what extend does the Council satisfy the conditions for recognition of either a government, or an insurgent movement in a civil war?

In case you missed it last week, Russia and China vetoed a resolution in the UN Security Council that would have established a step towards imposing sanctions on Syria.

The United Nations released a report this week that found systematic torture by Afghan government authorities of persons detained there, including those persons handed over to Afghan authorities by NATO forces. When we come to consider human rights, we will look at the extent to which NATO countries can be held responsible for such torture.

The trial of the "Christmas Day Bomber" or "Underwear Bomber", as he is variously known, Abdulmutallab, who was arrested after trying to detonate a bomb hidden in his underwear on a Detroit-bound air-liner, begins today in Federal Court. The outcome will no doubt feed into the debate over military commissions.

The Awlaki Targeting Issues

Further to the brief discussion in class of the Awlaki killing, here is a short post discussing the nationality issue. There there are a series of posts as Opinio Juris and Lawfare, with links to articles in TheNew York Times, first calling for disclosure of the legal analysis, then on the leak of information regarding the substance of an OLC memo on the legality of targeting Awlaki. We will return to these issues later in the course. Below are links to some of the key articles (it should be noted that the Lawfare authors are generally strong advocates of the US positions on the "so-called global war on terror", and Anderson is also a strong proponent of the targeted killing policy).

Opinio Juris posts: Anderson, Anderson on the Memo 1,  Anderson on the Memo 2; 

Lawfare posts: Goldsmith on Transparency; Pildes on Gov't Silence; Wakeman on the Kill List; 

Week 7 Readings

On Monday we will finish off our examination of individuals and corporations as subjects of international law, and in particular we will discuss the Nottenbohm case, the issue of dual nationality raised in Iran-U.S. claims tribunal, denationalization as reflected in the Ethiopia v. Eritrea case, and corporate nationality as determined in the Barcelona Traction case.

We should also get started on State Responsibility, which will be the focus of the class for the next few classes. After examining the general principles, we will focus on the principles of attribution of responsibility to another state, and in particular the Genocide Convention (Serbia v. Bosnia) case; and the then the principles governing breach of an obligation. You should spend some time become familiarizing yourself with the International Law Commission (ILC) Draft Articles on State Responsibility.

UNESCO to Vote on Palestinian Membership

The Board of UNESCO, the UN cultural heritage agency, voted yesterday to submit to a full vote the issue of Palestinian membership in UNESCO. We can see here the incremental steps towards full recognition as a sovereign state and member of the UN. More on the vote and its ramifications here.

Int'l Talk on Campus

"A Social Scientist’s Experience in Afghanistan"


October 12, noon, International House

Dr. Margaret Hawthorne is currently a Social Scientist/Instructor for the--- program at Fort Leavenworth. From April 2010 to February 2011 she served as a Department of Army Civilian in Kabul, Afghanistan where she provided mission relevant research to the NATO command. Dr. Hawthorne earned her PhD in History from the University of Kansas and was Associate Director of the Institute for the Study and Practice of Leadership at Washburn from 2002 to 2010.

Free and open to the public

GPS, CFR, and other Sources on Foreign Affairs.

I mentioned in class yesterday that Fareed Zarkaria's program on CNN on Sundays (at 10:00 and again at 13:00), is a good source of very sharp but also entertaining foreign affairs analysis. A link to his program on CNN is here, but you can also subscribe to both audio and video podcasts on iTunes.

Also very useful as a source of information on international affairs, is the Council on Foreign Relations, the general website for which is here, but again, podcasts of interesting panel discussions and analysis can be found on iTunes. 

Finally, you should check out the Foreign Policy magazine website, on which you can subscribe to a daily email round-up of international issues and events.

International Law Courses

For those of you who just can't get enough international law, you should note that the course "International Criminal Law and the Laws of War" (course 927) did not disappear from the course selection at WU, but has been re-named "The Law of Armed Conflict". It will be a course on international humanitarian law, or jus in bello, being the law governing the conduct of armed forces engaged in armed conflict. The text for the course will be Gary Solis, The Law of Armed Conflict.

State Secession and Self-Determination

As we wrap up our examination of state recognition and self-determination, it is interesting to note that the disputes over Kosovo independence flared up this week. As you will recall, Kosovo unilaterally declared independence, and the ICJ held that the declaration was not unlawful, but Serbia still refuses to acknowledge its independence or recognize it as an independent state. You can get an overview at Wikipedia here, but the should scan the ICJ decision itself, here.

Meanwhile, our friend and ally Georgia, and most of the rest of the world, refuses to recognize the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, about which you can read here, and here.

Readings - Other Subjects of Int'l Law

Next week we will wrap up our examination of states with the issue of aquisition and delimitation of territory, in Section 5 of Chapter 5. You should pay particular attention to the modes of acquisition, including the Island of Palmas case; and the principle of uti possidetis, reflected in the Burkino Faso v. Mali case.

Turning to International Organizations and NGOs in Chapter 6, read Section 1, 1(A), including the Reparations case; Section 1(B), skim both the Certain Expenses of the UN and the Tadic case excerpts; and in Section 2, the Charnovitz piece on NGOs.

Next we will look at the status of individuals and corporations as subjects, in Chapter 7. Review Section 1(A), and the Lagrand case in Section 1(B); Section 1(C); and Section 2(A-C), particularly the Nottenbohm case; In Section 2(D) the Iran-US Claims Tribunal; and in Section 2(E) the Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission.

In Section 3 we turn to the status of corporations. Just review Section 3(B) and the Barcelona Traction case.

Human Rights Issues this Week

When we get to human rights later in the course, we will examine a few issues that were once again in the news this week. Here are just a few:

Ban on veils in France

Capital Punishment in the U.S.

Women Granted Right to Vote in Saudi Arabia

Statehood and Palestine

On Monday we will continue with our examination of states as the primary subject of international law. We will begin with a discussion of the issue of Palestinian statehood, and the application submitted to the United Nations by the Palestinian Authority on Friday. Here are a couple of more articles on the issue that you might want to review in preparation for the discussion:

The Economist

The Economist on Hamas

The International Law Observer - Comment

We will also finish up our discussion of the right of self-determination, and move on to the recognition of governments, and the criteria for determining the acquisition and delimitation of territory.

Subjects of Int'l Law - States

Next week we will begin looking at the subjects of international law, beginning with states. Read, in particular, Chapter 5, Section 1; Section 2; Section 3 (parts A, and B); Section 4 (A (only p.348-49, and the Murphy piece), B (p.364-5)), C (Tinoco Claims arbitration).

More will be posted on further readings as we go.

To Be or Not To Be

As mentioned in class, the Palestinian Authority looks set to apply to both the U.N. Security Council for membership in the U.N., and to the General Assembly for observer status. Both are aimed at gaining recognition of Palestine as a state  under international law. News reports on its bid, and the opposition by the U.S. government are can be found here, here, and here. There is much more on the web if you are interested. Here is also a Crisis Group report on the issue.

Consider the application in the context of your readings for next week on the nature of states as subjects of international law, and the criteria for determining whether an entity is or is not a state.

Other Sources of International Law

Once finished with Customary International Law, we will turn to examine other sources, namely general principles of law, judicial decisions and publicists, and ancilliary sources such as UN General Assembly resolutions.

In doing the reading, focus on the following sections:

- Section 1 (A), Tadic, and the Schacter piece;
- Section 1 (B) Equity and Good Faith, and the Friedman piece; and "proportionality" beginning on p.252., and Corfu Channel (p.253);
- Section 2 (A), Judicial Decisions (whole section).
- Section 2 (B), teachings of publicists - just skim;
- Section 3 (A), UN resolutions, and Filartiga v. Pena-Irala;
- Section 3 (B), skim Security Council lawmaking;
- Section 6, Unilateral Act, Nuclear Test case (New Zealand v. France).

Dueling Reports on Israeli Blockade

As reported here last week, a U.N. panel released a report on the Israeli actions in boarding the flotilla of largely Turkish vessels bound for Gaza, in which 9 people were killed by Israeli forces. While finding that Israeli use of force was excessive, the panel held that the Israeli blockade itself was consistent with international law. This week, a committee of the U.N. Human Rights Council came to the opposite conclusion. This is likely going to lead to another round of debate on the issue. Examples of earlier analysis can be found here , here, and here. Below is a new report shortly after the incident.

Customary International Law Continued

As we continue our examination of customary international law, we will focus on the  North Sea Continental Shelf case, Nicaragua v. U.S.A., and the various pieces on jus cogens norms and normative hierarchies within custom. Finally, by the end of the week we will be looking at the relationship between treaty and custom, in Section 3 of Chapter 2. Review the Schachter piece briefly, but focus on part C and the notes thereto.

Some questions to consider as you go through the material, are:

- to what extent does the court's position in the Nuclear Weapons case depart from and overturn the presumptions in the SS Lotus case?

- How is the element of time dealt with by the court in North Sea Continental Shelf? How would that support or negate the more recent arguments for "instant custom" (see note 8 on p.89 and note 3 on p.95)?

- We will return to look at Nicaragua v. U.S.A. several times during the course. What you have here is only a very short excerpt. You may want to familiarize yourself with the context of this excerpt by looking at the summary of the case, which you can find at the ICJ website, a link for which is in the right margin.

- Why is it that the court in Nicaragua spends less time examining evidence of widespread state practice?

- How can a state resist the obligations of customary international law that might emerge from the widespread adherence to a treaty that the state specifically decided not to agree to? How does that impact on the issue of consent? Conversely, should we permit states to opt out of norms that are becoming increasingly universal? Should South Africa, for instance, have been permitted to opt out of norms prohibiting racial discrimination?

Customary International Law

On Friday we will begin our examination of customary international law. We will discuss the cases Paqete Habana, the SS Lotus (France v. Turkey), the Advisory Opinion on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,  and we may have time to begin discussion of North Sea Continental Shelf (Germany v. Denmark v. Netherlands). So, in addition to reviewing the introductory material on customary international law, pay particular attention to these cases.

International Law Round-up

The former Army Chief of Staff in the Former Yugoslavia, Momcilo Perisic, was convicted this week of crimes against humanity and war crimes, for the attacks of Serb forces on civilians, and for the support he provided to the Bosnian Serb forces that, among other things, were responsible for the massacre in Srebrenicia.

Last week the U.N. panel reviewing the legality of the Israeli use of force against the Turkish flotilla in international waters last year, released its report last week. News stories on the release, and the impact on the deteriorating relations between Israel and Turkey, can be found here and here, while the report itself is here. We may touch on this when we get to the Use of Force. There is a lot of scholarship, both pro and con, on the issue of the legality of the Israeli actions, for those interested in the issue.

Finally, an issue that is looming like a runaway freight train this month, is the intention of the Palestinian Authority to seek recognition of the state of Palestine and its admission to the United Nations. The U.S. has indicated its intention to veto any such application in the Security Council, but it cannot block a vote in the General Assembly, where the application is expected to win majority support. You should follow this, as we will discuss it when we come to issues of state recognition, the essential criteria for the existence of a state, and U.N. membership.

Wikileaks and International Law

As most of you will have seen, the Wikileaks issue is back in the news, as a new and large batch of diplomatic cables has been released, and reports surface that the entire cache of cables is actually available somewhere on the web.

An investigation is ongoing in the U.S. to determine whether Julian Assange, the principal and founder of Wikileaks, should be prosecuted under U.S. law, specifically the 1917 Espionage Act. (For those interested in reading more on the entire sage of the Wikileaks disclosure of classified military and diplomatic cables, a useful collection can be found on the New York Times website here).

There are obvious constitutional issues raised by such a prosecution (1st amendment); but what issues would such a prosecution raise from an international law perspective? We will address this later in the course, but give it some thought. What principle of international law might be implicated?

Garcia v. Texas - International and Domestic Law

For those of you interested in reading more about the Garcia v. Texas case, as an example of the frequent tension between international law and the domestic law of federal states, here is a helpful blog-post review of the case. The Supreme Court decision itself can be found here.

The government of the United States argued in an amicus brief that the international relations of the U.S. would be harmed if Texas proceeded with the execution, in violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Interestingly, earlier this year the United States insisted on strict compliance with the companion treaty, the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, in the case of the CIA officer held in Pakistan for killing two people in the streets of Lahore. You can read more about that case at the links here, here and here.

We will look at the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations later in the course, and consider whether Mr. Davis was indeed entitled to diplomatic immunity.

American Society of International Law

Those of you with more than a passing interest in international law should explore all that the American Society of International Law has to offer, and consider registering for a student membership. Here is a link to the most recent ASIL "post", which is a bi-weekly email providing an update on all things relating to international law that has happened in the last two weeks. You can also go to the ASIL website and explore the wealth of resources it provides. The ASIL conference in April, in Washington D.C. (overlapping with the international rounds of the Jessup International Law Moot) is one of the largest annual international law conferences.

Genocide Convention and ICCPR Reservations

On Monday we will continue our examination of the reservations in the law of treaties. As you prepare for class, consider the following questions:

- In considering the ICJ's Advisory Opinion on the Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, what do you think was the rationale for the "traditional" position on acceptance/objection with respect to reservations? What was the reasoning of the Court in articulating a new theory?

- How is that new rationale reflected in the VCLT?

- How should we understand the U.S. reservation to the Genocide Convention in light of this decision? What is the "object and purpose" of the Convention? How are we to assess whether the U.S. reservation defeats that object and purpose?

- Why should reservations to human rights treaties be treated differently from those to other kinds of multi-lateral treaty?

- Which do you think is the better argument on reservations to the ICCPR - the Human Rights Committee, or the U.S. government? Why? What would be the implications for the law of treaties of either argument?

We will also begin examining the fundamental issues of observance, application and interpretation. Be sure to review the relevant VCLT articles as you read the beginning of Section 4.

The extract from the case Bosnia Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro, is being used here to illustrate several principles of interpretation. The notes following the case are particularly helpful in understanding what principles of interpretation were used and how they were employed in the case.

Law of Treaties - Readings

Next week we will continue to look at the Law of Treaties, picking up where we left off on the issue of reservations. Pay particular attention to the ICJ advisory opinion, and the Human Rights Committee comments on reservations to the ICCPR.

In Section 4, on "Observance, Application, and Interpretation," read all of pp. 163-177, but in the notes beginning at p. 177, you need only review notes 2, 3, 7, 10, and 11.

When we turn to Section 5 on "Invalidity of Treaties," you will need to read parts A, and skim parts B and C; we will pay more close attention to part D on conflict with jus cogens norms.

In Section 6, "Termination or Suspension of Treaties," we will look at parts A and B closely, and in part C, pay particular attention to the Report of the ILC (and following notes), and the Advisory Opinion on Namibia. In part D, again the Report of the ILC, and the Babcikovo-Nagymaros Project case (which will come up several times during the course).

Hate Crimes and Freedom of Expression - for those who were interested in exploring further a different perspective on the balance between freedom of expression and equality rights in crafting hate-speech laws, you might be interested in the R. v. Keegstra decision of the Supreme Court of Canada that was mentioned in class. The headnote is quite detailed and will give you a sense of the argument if you don't have time to read the entire opinion.

Law of Treaties - Conclusion, Capacity, Consent, and Reservations

The International Criminal Court

On Friday we will continue the discussion of the law of treaties, looking in particular at the issues of concluding a treaty, capacity to enter into treaty,  methods of expressing consent, and reservations. Some points to think about as you review the material:

- What was the significance of the Bush Administration famously "un-signing" the ICC Rome Statute? What explanation can you find in the VCLT for the US government having done so?

- What are the pros and cons of permitting reservations? Does the rationale differ if the treaty is a human rights treaty as opposed to, say, a regional trade treaty? If so, why?

- Consider, for purposes of discussion, the U.S. reservations to the ICCPR (reservation to Art. 20(2)), and the Genocide Convention (general reservation), and the ICJ's opinion on the matter of reservations, and the Human Rights Committee's views on reservations to the ICCPR.

Welcome to Public International Law, Fall 2011

As we get started on the somewhat mundane subject of the law of treaties, consider how it might be used in responding to the burning questions of the day. Here is a link to a post yesterday, on the international law blog Opinio Juris, discussing the question of whether the new Libyan government would be obliged to turn Col. Qaddafi over to the International Criminal Court.