Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

Lng||sh art|c|e

1he posL 9/11 landscape presenLs many quesLlons regardlng legal frameworks whlch should apply
Loward conLrolllng lnLernaLlonal Lerrorlsm 1he war ls belng foughL ln flve sLraLeglc ways (accordlng Lo
Lhe resldenLs speech aL Lhe naLlonal LndowmenL for uemocracy CcL 6 2003) (1) prevenLlng LerrorlsL
aLLacks before Lhey occur (2) denylng WMu Lo ouLlaw reglmes and LerrorlsL allles (3) denylng radlcal
groups Lhe supporL and sancLuary of ouLlaw reglmes (4) denylng mlllLanLs conLrol of any naLlon and (3)
denylng mlllLanLs any fuLure recrulLs by advanclng democracy and hope across Lhe Mlddle LasL Cne
could speculaLe LhaL Lhe Amerlcan Way of War (vandlver 2003) has evolved progresslvely wlLh Lhe
counLrys rlse as a global hyperpower and ls leavlng anLlquaLed lnsLlLuLlons behlnd ln facL one could
argue LhaL Lhe processes of crlmlnal law alone are lnadequaLe Lo flghL such a confllcL or even effecLlvely
deLer lL AddlLlonally democraLlc law may ln facL only serve Lo compllcaLe Lhe effecLlveness of such a
war 1haL ls because democraLlc socleLles are valuebased codlfled ln poslLlve law Lhey're effecLlvely
prohlblLed from combaLlng Lerrorlsm ln cerLaln arenas such as consLanL survelllance resLrlcLlons on
Lravel and LorLure ln effecL democraLlc reglmes are llmlLed by Lhelr own laws and values and have
declded noL Lo become whaL Lhey seek Lo eradlcaLe 1hls polnL may be beLLer lllusLraLed when one
conslders LhaL LoLallLarlan reglmes are relaLlvely free from Lerrorlsm problems llghLlng a war wlLh one
hand Lled behlnd your back seems Lo be Lhe faLe of democracles who pursue wars on Lerror
vALlul1? Cl Au1PC8l1? 1C uLSlCnA1L 1L88C8lSM

1he classlc case regardlng valldlLy of deslgnaLlng organlzaLlons as LerrorlsLs ls eoples Mo[ahedln
CrganlzaLlon of lran v ueparLmenL of SLaLe and Colln owell (someLlmes abbrevlaLed as Crgan of lran v
owell 2003) 1he case ls so lmporLanL Lhe followlng brlef ls presenLed for undersLandlng as follows
lAC1S ln 1PL CASL
An lranlan dlssldenL organlzaLlon (MCl) peLlLloned for revlew of lLs deslgnaLlon as an l1C (forelgn
LerrorlsL organlzaLlon) under Lhe AnLlLerrorlsm and LffecLlve ueaLh enalLy AcL (ALuA) on
consLlLuLlonal grounds as well as Lhe facL lL was an organlzaLlon dedlcaLed Lo overLhrowlng Lhe same
despoLlc reglme ln lran LhaL Lhe uS governmenL was opposed Lo 1he CourL of Appeals held LhaL (1) Lhe
SecreLary of SLaLes conslderaLlon of classlfled maLerlal ln maklng deslgnaLlon dld noL vlolaLe Lhe due
process clause (2) any due process vlolaLlon was harmless and (3) Lhe clalm LhaL Lhe organlzaLlons
acLlons could noL be consLrued as Lerrorlsm because Lhe organlzaLlon lLself was formed Lo flghL oLher
SLaLe ueparLmenLdeslgnaLed sponsors of Lerrorlsm was non[usLlclable eLlLlon was denled
lSSuLS ln 1PL CASL
1 uld Lhe exerclse of Lhe SecreLary of SLaLes war and naLlonal emergency powers lnvolve any
posslble due process vlolaLlons from nondlsclosure of classlfled lnformaLlon and ln maklng a LerrorlsL
deslgnaLlon?
2 Are Lhe LxecuLlve 8ranch powers Lo deLermlne who ls a LerrorlsL and who ls a LerrorlsL supporLer
and vlceversa a maLLer of non[usLlclable forelgn pollcy open Lo dlspuLe and/or sub[ecL Lo adequaLe
[udlclal revlew?
8LASCnlnC Anu AnAL?SlS
1he CourL noLed LhaL Lhls was Lhe Lhlrd Llme MCl aLLempLed Lo seek revlew lrrespecLlve of any
urgency assoclaLed wlLh blocklng of funds vla enforcemenL of ALuA lL was furLher noLed LhaL ALuA
expressly sLaLes LhaL Lhe SecreLary of SLaLe ls Lo conslder classlfled lnformaLlon ln maklng a deslgnaLlon
and LhaL such classlfled lnformaLlon ls noL sub[ecL Lo dlsclosure excepL Lo a revlewlng courL ex parLe and
ln camera per 8 uSC 1189(a)(3)(8) A deslgnaLlon under Lhe AcL perslsLs for Lwo years and Lhe
SecreLary may redeslgnaLe a forelgn organlzaLlon for succeedlng Lwoyear perlods affordlng plenLy of
Llme for dlscreLlonary revlew ln order Lo be so deslgnaLed Lhree flndlngs musL be based on Lhe
admlnlsLraLlve record LhaL
A Lhe organlzaLlon ls a forelgn organlzaLlon
8 Lhe organlzaLlon engages ln LerrorlsL acLlvlLy and
C Lhe LerrorlsL acLlvlLy or Lerrorlsm of Lhe organlzaLlon LhreaLens Lhe securlLy of unlLed SLaLes naLlonals
or Lhe naLlonal securlLy of Lhe unlLed SLaLes
1he Appeals CourL of uC ls furLher empowered under 1189(b) Lo hold unlawful and seL aslde
deslgnaLlons found Lo be
(A) arblLrary caprlclous an abuse of dlscreLlon or oLherwlse noL ln accordance wlLh law
(8) conLrary Lo consLlLuLlonal rlghL power prlvllege or lmmunlLy
(C) ln excess of sLaLuLory [urlsdlcLlon auLhorlLy or llmlLaLlon or shorL of sLaLuLory rlghL
(u) lacklng subsLanLlal supporL ln Lhe admlnlsLraLlve record Laken as a whole or ln classlfled lnformaLlon
submlLLed Lo Lhe courL under paragraph (2) or
(L) noL ln accord wlLh Lhe procedures requlred by law
LxCL81S l8CM 1PL CASL
Colorful argumenLs sLemmlng from Abourezk v 8eagan 1986 clalms Lo due process rlghLs wlll noL
carry Lhe day 1he nondlsclosure of ex parLe and ln camera lnformaLlon occurs ln con[uncLlon wlLh
requlred noLlce LhaL Lhe deslgnaLlon ls lmpendlng and an opporLunlLy Lo be heard aL a meanlngful Llme
and ln a meanlngful manner whlch Lhe SecreLary of SLaLe complled wlLh
Lven lf Lhe record here supporLed a flndlng of vlolaLlon of due process such a vlolaLlon would be
harmless as Lhe unaffecLed porLlon of Lhe record ls ample Lo supporL Lhe deLermlnaLlon made 1he
publlc unclasslfled admlnlsLraLlve record conLalns more Lhan enough evldence Lo supporL Lhe
deLermlnaLlon LhaL Lhe peLlLloner engaged or engages ln LerrorlsL acLlvlLy 1he governmenL followed Lhe
requlred procedures as seL down ln Councll of 8eslsLance of lran v ueparLmenL of SLaLe 231 l3d 192
(uCClr2001)

LLCl1lMAC? Cl A8CACPLS 1C CCM8A1 1L88C8lSM

1hls secLlon plcks up on a broader look aL some of Lhe modern approaches Laken Lo combaL Lhe
problem aLLempLlng Lo analyze Lhe legal leglLlmacy of cerLaln naLlonal securlLy poslLlons Laken by Lhe
8ush AdmlnlsLraLlon as well as aLLempLlng Lo lncorporaLe lnLernaLlonal law on Lhe sub[ecL AlLhough
many efforLs have been puLforLh buL none fully raLlfled Lo comprehenslvely deflne Lhe LerrorlsL acL
wlLhln Lhe global communlLy Lhe plecemeal" approach seems Lo be Lhe meLhodology mosL commonly
followed 1hls approach conslsLs prlmarlly of varlous global LreaLles and numerous reglonal convenLlons
and bllaLeral agreemenLs all ln an efforL Lo essenLlally combaL Lerrorlsm from dlfferenL angles some
deallng speclflcally wlLh lnLernaLlonal Lerrorlsm lLself whlle oLhers addresslng lL only wlLhln Lhe
framework of varlous oLher crlmes and lssues lor example Lhe unlLed naLlons has adopLed many
anLlLerrorlsL convenLlons daLlng back Lo Lhe 1960's See un ConvenLlons AgalnsL 1errorlsm A few
convenLlons are dlscussed below

1he ConvenLlon on Lhe revenLlon and unlshmenL of Crlmes AgalnsL lnLernaLlonally roLecLed
ersons (1973) whlch ln parL mandaLes naLlonsLaLes a parLy Lo Lhe ConvenLlon Lo cooperaLe ln
prevenLlng and preparlng for aLLacks agalnsL dlplomaLs exchange lnformaLlon readlly (such as Lhe
ldenLlLy and whereabouLs of suspecLs who fled Lo oLher counLrles) even apprehend offenders and hold
Lhem as well as encourage (noL mandaLe) Lhe exLradlLlon of suspecLs beLween SLaLe parLles

1he un ConvenLlon AgalnsL Lhe 1aklng of PosLages (1979) lncorporaLes hosLageLaklng as a grave
breach" under Lhe 1949 Ceneva ConvenLlon 8elaLlve Lo Lhe roLecLlon of Clvlllan ersons ln 1lme of
War noL Lo menLlon Lhe PosLage ConvenLlon also represenLs a parLlal re[ecLlon of Lhe Lhesls LhaL acLs of
Lerrorlsm are permlsslble lf commlLLed as parL of a war on naLlonal llberaLlon (Moore 1urner 2003)

1he lnLernaLlonal ConvenLlon for Lhe Suppresslon of Lhe llnanclng of 1errorlsm (1999) and Lhe
ConvenLlon on Lhe rohlblLlon of Lhe uevelopmenL roducLlon SLockplllng and use of Chemlcal
Weapons and on 1helr uesLrucLlon (1997) Lhe former almed dlrecLly aL LlghLenlng conLrols freezlng
asseLs and generally helghLenlng Lhe culpablllLy of enLlLles LhaL acLlvely fund Lerrorlsm and Lhe laLLer
focuslng on Lhe LermlnaLlon of chemlcal weapons by Lhe year 2010 as well as creaLlng verlflcaLlon
procedures Lo ensure such measures are complled wlLh

numerous 8eglonal ConvenLlons and 8llaLeral AgreemenLs also exlsL addresslng lnLernaLlonal
counLerLerrorlsm efforLs wlLhln cerLaln conLexLs Whlle some usefulness ln Lhe flghL on Lerror ls galned
from such agreemenLs quesLlons sLlll abound over Lhelr commlLmenL (ln force) Lo adhere Lo exLradlLlon
and prosecuLlon requlremenLs MosL noLably such agreemenLs lack sLrengLh and conslsLency ln regards
Lo exLradlLlon lor example boLh Lhe Arab ConvenLlon on Lhe Suppresslon of 1errorlsm and Lhe CAu
ConvenLlon on Lhe revenLlon and CombaLlng of 1errorlsm ralse excepLlons Lo Lhe exLradlLlon (and
prosecuLlon) of suspecLed LerrorlsLs lf Lhe pollLlcal offense docLrlne applles (explalned below) ArLlcle
2(a) of Lhe Arab ConvenLlon sLaLes LhaL all cases of sLruggle agalnsL forelgn occupaLlon and
aggresslon for llberaLlon and selfdeLermlnaLlon ln accordance wlLh Lhe prlnclples of lnLernaLlonal law
should noL be regarded as an offense 1hls provlslon shall noL apply Lo any acL pre[udlclng LerrlLorlal
lnLegrlLy of any Arab SLaLe" (presumably lncluded Lo proLecL LerrorlsLs acLlng agalnsL lsrael) Slmllarly
ArLlcle 3(1) of Lhe CAu ConvenLlon proposes LhaL any acL Laken ln furLherance of llberaLlon or self
deLermlnaLlon agalnsL colonlallsm occupaLlon aggresslon or domlnaLlon by forelgn forces shall nC1 be
consldered a LerrorlsL acL Whlle such provlslons are ln sharp conLrasL Lo ArLlcle 3 of Lhe un 8omblng
ConvenLlon whlch ln parL sLaLes LhaL LerrorlsL bomblngs are under no clrcumsLances [usLlflable by
pollLlcal ldeologlcal rellglous or oLher slmllar naLure and are punlshable by penalLles conslsLenL wlLh
Lhelr grave naLure" Lhe lnconslsLencles (and many oLhers LhaL exlsL) are lllusLraLlve of Lhe loose and
lncoherenL efforL Lo combaL lnLernaLlonal Lerror
1PL CLl1lCAL CllLnSL uCC18lnL

1he pollLlcal offense docLrlne ls noL forelgn Lo Amerlcan [urlsprudence ln facL uS courLs ln Lhree
speclflc cases decllned Lo exLradlLe l8A members Lo Lhe unlLed klngdom relylng ln parL on Lhe pollLlcal
offense docLrlne (ln re McMullen (nu Cal May 11 1979) ln re Mackln (1981 unreporLed) and uS v
uoherLy 786 l 2d 491 (2d Clr 1986)) Powever lL should be noLed LhaL ln uoherLy deporLaLlon was
used as an alLernaLlve Lo exLradlLlon uoherLy was wanLed for Lhe murder of a 8rlLlsh soldler and
escape from prlson 1he Supreme CourL upheld hls deporLaLlon Lo norLhern lreland and LhereafLer uS
courLs have recognlzed LhaL when exLradlLlon LreaLles exlsL beLween Lwo counLrles (as beLween Lhe uS
and Lhe unlLed klngdom ln Lhe uoherLy case) oLher means (llke requesLed deporLaLlon) may be used Lo
obLaln Lhe cusLody of crlmlnals seeklng refuge abroad
LLCl1lMAC? Cl 1PL 8uSP AuMlnlS18A1lCn A8CACP

Soon afLer Lhe 9/11 aLLacks resldenL 8ush was faced wlLh a challenglng declslon how exacLly Lo
flghL Lhe war on Lerror lf he chose Lhe LradlLlonal rouLe (see uS v 8ahman 1993 bomblng of World
1rade CenLer) Lhrough crlmlnal lnvesLlgaLlon and prosecuLlon he faced Lhe very real prospecL of crlmlnal
proceedlngs wlLhln federal courLs or even lnLernaLlonal courLs and Lrlbunals noL Lo menLlon exLradlLlon
or rendlLlon procedures and dllemmas and Lhe cerLaln ConsLlLuLlonal safeguards of due process (rlghLs
lnherenL under Lhe llfLh SlxLh and LlghLh AmendmenLs Cr alLernaLlvely Lhe resldenL could choose a
broader mlllLary and dlplomaLlc response ln hls efforLs Lo eradlcaLe LerrorlsL organlzaLlons and Lhose
who supporLed Lhem ulLlmaLely Lhe lmporLance of Lhls laLLer declslon was LhaL waglng war does noL
for Lhe mosL parL lmpllcaLe Lhe proLecLlons consLlLuLlonal or oLherwlse lnherenL ln crlmlnal
proceedlngs" (Shanor Pogue 2003) As crlmlnal law generally Lakes a backseaL durlng warLlme efforLs
Lhe resldenL effecLlvely chose war" as Amerlca's Lool Lo combaL Lerrorlsm even Lhough he dld so ln
Lhe absence of an offlclal Congresslonal declaraLlon of war a LradlLlonal sLaLe opponenL (Lerrorlsm ls
generally LhoughL of only as a neLwork noL a sLaLe) and no lndlcaLlon of lLs evenLual end (LhaL ls how
can a sLaLeless neLwork wlLh many deLached parLs come LogeLher Lo effecLuaLe a surrender on behalf of
all LerrorlsL organlzaLlons?) Powever Lhls ls noL Lo suggesL LhaL Lhe resldenL's LacLlcal declslon ls
beyond hls execuLlve power clLlng ln parL hls naLlonal emergency powers under Lhe War owers
8esoluLlon and Lhe recenLly enacLed AuLhorlzaLlon for use of MlllLary lorce !olnL 8esoluLlon" (called
SenaLe !olnL 8esoluLlon 23 or ubllc Law 10740 113 SLaL 224) whlch ln effecL auLhorlzed Lhe
resldenL Lo use all necessary and approprlaLe force agalnsL Lhose naLlons organlzaLlons or persons he
deLermlnes planned auLhorlzed commlLLed or alded Lhe aLLacks and recognlzed Lhe resldenL's
auLhorlLy under Lhe ConsLlLuLlon Lo Lake acLlon Lo deLer and prevenL acLs of lnLernaLlonal Lerrorlsm
agalnsL Lhe unlLed SLaLes" (quoLlng Pamdan v 8umsfeld 2003 WL 1633046 (uC Clr !uly 2003)

1PL uL1Ln1lCn Cl unLAWluL CCM8A1An1S

ln Lhe case of 8oumedlene eL al v 8ush (2008) a deeply dlvlded Supreme CourL (34) ruled LhaL
forelgn deLalnees held for years aL CuanLanamo 8ay ln Cuba have Lhe rlghL Lo appeal Lo uS clvlllan
courLs Lo challenge Lhelr lndeflnlLe lmprlsonmenL wlLhouL charges !usLlce kennedy sald Lhe laws and
ConsLlLuLlon are deslgned Lo survlve and remaln ln force ln exLraordlnary Llmes" kennedy recognlzed
Lhe LerrorlsLlc LhreaLs Lhe uS faces and undersLood Lhe [usLlflcaLlons for Lhe deLenLlons buL sald he has
Lo slde wlLh whaL Lhe framers wanLed !usLlce Scalla sald Lhls declslon wlll make Lhe war harder on us
lL wlll almosL cerLalnly cause more Amerlcans Lo be kllled !usLlce Scalla clLed a reporL by SenaLe
8epubllcans whlch sald aL leasL 30 prlsoners have reLurned Lo Lhe baLLlefleld followlng Lhelr release from
CuanLanamo Some 400+ deLalnees have been released so far and Lhe remalnder (abouL 300) fall lnLo
Lhree caLegorles (1) Lhose who are Lo be Lrled on crlmlnal charges (2) Lhose who could be Lransferred
or repaLrlaLed Lo Lhelr home counLry safeLy permlLLlng and (3) Lhose whom Lhe 8ush admlnlsLraLlon
says lL wonL release even Lhough Lhey wonL face charges 1he flrsL group ls unllkely Lo ever recelve
convlcLlons slnce Lhelr lawyers wlll ralse all sorLs of legal defenses up Lo and lncludlng unflLness Lo sLand
Lrlal because of all Lhose years of deLenLlon 1he second group lnvolves deLalnees such as Lhe ulghurs
pronounced WLL gurs Musllms from wesLern Chlna who say Lhey wlll be LorLured lf Lhey are
reLurned Lo Lhelr home counLrles and have slnce been repaLrlaLed Lo Albanla and 8ermuda 1he Lhlrd
group whlch ls mosLly reLalned for Lhelr lnLelllgence value could be looklng aL a Llmely release
dependlng on Lhelr securlLy LhreaL level buL are lndeed Lhe source of much execuLlve[udlclal branch
confllcL on Lhls lssue ln any evenL as of mld2008 Lhe MlllLary Commlsslons AcL of 2006 whlch denles
CuanLanamo deLalnees Lhe rlghL Lo habeas corpus has been sLruck Lown WhaL remalns Lo be seen ls
wheLher Lhe law ls movlng ln a dlrecLlon where unlawful combaLanLs (le LerrorlsLs) end up wlLh more
rlghLs Lhan prlsoners of war (le soldlers)

1PL LCnC A8M Cl 1PL LAW Anu 8ln LAuLn

1he 8ln Laden case ls lnsLrucLlve Lo how uS domesLlc sLaLuLes can apply Lo acLlvlLles ouLslde Lhe
LerrlLorlal llmlLs of Lhe uS AddlLlonally lL seLs Lhe sLage for a dlscusslon over consLlLuLlonal rlghLs versus
naLlonal securlLy lnLeresLs as well as many oLher lssues lL ls revlewed below and ls perhaps Lhe mosL
lmporLanL case covered ln Lhls lecLure

1he case of uS v 8ln Laden (92 l Supp 2d 189 uS ulsL CL n? 2000) ls a mulLlfaceLed case LhaL
presenLs several lssues relevanL Lo our conslderaLlons namely afflrmlng LhaL a cerLaln naLlonal securlLy
excepLlon applles Lo Lhe 4Lh AmendmenL search and selzures guaranLees oLherwlse unconsLlLuLlonal
and LhaL uS lederal Law carrles ln cerLaln clrcumsLances exLraLerrlLorlal appllcaLlons (LhaL ls
appllcaLlon ouLslde Lhe unlLed SLaLes) 1he former lssue wlll be explored laLer ln a lecLure on clvll rlghLs
and naLlonal securlLy whlle Lhe laLLer wlll be examlned brlefly here

ln Lhe 8ln Laden case flfLeen defendanLs (mosLly forelgn naLlonals) were lndlcLed on federal charges
ranglng from consplracy Lo murder uS clLlzens Lo Lhe use of weapons of mass desLrucLlon Lo Lhe
consplracy Lo desLroy uS bulldlngs and properLy ln addlLlon Lhe lndlcLmenL also lncluded 223 counLs of
murder for cerLaln defendanLs sLemmlng from ln parL Lhe uS Lmbassy bomblngs ln nalrobl kenya and
uar es Salaam 1anzanla

Slnce Lhe defendanLs reslded and acLed ouLslde Lhe uS Lhe defendanLs challenged ln parL Lhe uS
auLhorlLy boLh under Lhe ConsLlLuLlon and under lnLernaLlonal law Lo apply uS federal crlmlnal sLaLuLes
abroad LssenLlally Lhe defendanLs conLended LhaL Lhe sLaLuLes LhaL form Lhe basls of Lhe lndlcLmenL
fall clearly Lo regulaLe Lhe conducL of forelgn naLlonals for conducL ouLslde Lhe LerrlLorlal boundarles of
Lhe unlLed SLaLes

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen