Comparative Legal Research: Mapping the Legal and Policy Landscape for Upholding Criminal Procedural Rights in the Context of Counter-Terrorism (original) (raw)
Related papers
2018
More than just a synthesis of the four conferences and scientific reports of the European program, this final conference was intended to be a time for reflection, seeking, as Cyril Roth (program coordinator) put it in his introductory presentation, "to turn our attention to what's to come," in particular by examining "the foreseeable future of the judicial world" in regard to the fight against terrorism. What are the challenges that European judicial authorities must now face or will need to face in the years to come? Already a strong presence on political and judicial agendas, these challenges involve the management not only of persons accused of terrorism and imprisoned on European soil, for example, but also men, women and children still in the war zone. These issues have an impact on the judicial domain not only due to geopolitical developments, but also to the unique experiences of each European state in dealing with attacks and with the judicial management of returnees or other persons engaged in armed jihad. In security terms, these particular examples fall within a more general framework, probing the judicial response to terrorism in light of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and respect for public freedoms.
Asia Pacific Law Review, 2015
The events of 11 September 2001 resulted in an extraordinary increase in academic attention paid to counter-terrorism and international law. The years since then have seen numerous changes to the international legal landscape pertaining to counter-terrorism, and to the very nature of terrorism itself. Several international legal scholars have attempted to keep pace with current developments in this field,1 with Leiden University Professors Larissa van den Herik and Nico Shrivjer offering one of the most recent attempts to comprehensively scan and analyze the variety of counter-terrorism strategies that fall under the wide umbrella of the international legal order in their edited collection.2 This review begins by briefly summarizing the three main parts of Counter-Terrorism Strategies in a Fragmented International Legal Order, which focus on international cooperation in the prevention and investigation of terrorism (Part I), the use of force against terrorists (Part II), and the intersection between human rights law and international human rights law in the fight against terrorism (Part III). My focus then turns to analyzing how, and to what extent, the book makes a scholarly contribution to the academic field and the policy arena. Lastly, some of the book's limitations will be noted and some issues to be discussed in future editions will be suggested.
PhD programme in History, Studies of Security and Defence, 2019
The role of terrorism in political discourse changed dramatically over the last fifty years, moving from ambiguity to the forefront of public policy and security concern. After the 9/11 attacks, terrorism has earned the news headlines, and has become a global security priority. Governments and the international community have enhanced measures to counter international and transnational terrorism, although there is no universally accepted definition of the term. The lack of an undisputed and legally binding definition of terrorism leaves significant room for free interpretation by policymakers. Governments are given what is essentially a carte blanche to develop programs and counter-terrorism initiatives that may lead, or have already led, to the development of policy that infringes on fundamental human rights. This thesis investigates the connection between terrorism and fundamental human rights. The question that guided this dissertation is the potential consequence of arbitrary and politically-driven definitions of terrorism over counter-terrorism policy and fundamental human rights. The thesis moves from a historical framing of the concept of terrorism that changes with time. There are many definitions of the term, and there is no common definition with legal value. The current debate on terrorism is linked almost exclusively with non-state actors, which implies that state and terrorism have no linkage, even if there are evidences of these ties. The thesis scrutinizes the instrumentalization of terrorism, starting from an analysis of the concept based on three pillars: historical, theoretical-conceptual and legal (in the light of international law and human rights law). Then an empirical analysis based on these tools through the use of political and legal mechanisms to obtain a political output was conducted. To answer the starting question, the research moved from a historical-documentary analysis, then took into consideration the literature, and focused on how the states use the justification of the fight against international terrorism to restrict fundamental human rights. After the theoretical-conceptual and legal analysis, the research focuses on the legal aspects of the War on Terror and security policies. Large part of the empyrical research is dedicated to scrutinize the case of Turkey after the 2016 coup d'état attempt, to review some rulings of the European Courts, and to examine some prominent 'terrorist' organizations. While this topic presents a serious challenge, it does open much room for possible explorations of new fields of research without necessitating a fixed point of departure – or arrival. The thesis ends suggesting some future research directions.
The resilence of the Human Rights Norm in an Era of Counter-Terrorism
UNISCI Discussion Papers, 2012
This article seeks to explore the tensions arising from the interaction between human rights and counter-terrorism and contribute to the debate on the feasibility of sustaining the former in such trying situations as the latter through the determination of a role for the United Nations' Human Rights treaty monitoring bodies in protecting human rights while countering terrorism. While the article acknowledges and does not for a moment suggest that this mechanism is intended to be the panacea for the problem raised, it is explored with the understanding of its potential in contributing to the work of the larger United Nations' human rights machinery in protecting human rights while countering terrorism. The article begins with a brief discussion of the relationship between counter-terrorism and human rights and the many controversies surrounding the debate which will be the focus of the first part of the article. The second part provides a detailed examination and thematic analysis of the work of the United Nations' human rights treaty bodies in the area of protecting human rights while countering terrorism through which a role for the human rights treaty monitoring bodies is seen to emerge. This role is given further perspective and refinement through the addressing of the weaknesses, both internal and external, of the United Nations' human rights treaty system and through recommendations for further action which will be the focus of the third part of the article.
Human Rights: Substantive and Institutional Implications of the War Against Terrorism
European Journal of International Law, 2003
The September 11 attacks 'changed the world', but did they also change the human rights agenda? What role do human rights play in the context of terrorism? This article argues that violations of human rights are a major causal factor of terrorism. Consequently, the fight against terrorism should not only focus on military means, but should also address the worldwide lack of respect for human rights. A clear civil reaction (i.e. a prevention strategy) is needed. The article argues further that there is a direct link between terrorist attacks and human rights. Acts of terrorism aim at violating human rights. However, it is debatable whether human rights law could and should apply to acts of terrorists, as such acts are perpetrated mostly by non-state actors. It is therefore argued that one way to hold terrorists responsible is to qualify their acts as 'crimes against humanity'. Furthermore, the article shows that there is a dangerous tendency to legitimize human rights violations under the pretext of combating terrorism. Effective action against terrorism, it is said, must respect international human rights standards and make use of existing legal mechanisms if derogations are seen as indispensable. The existing body of international human rights law and the system of the United Nations establish clear boundaries for any legal action against terrorism.
European and United States Counter-Terrorism Policies, the Rule of Law and Human Rights
2011
The first part of the GGP High-Level Policy Seminar (HLPS) consisted of a transatlantic dialogue on legal issues in the fight against terrorism, with addresses by the Legal Adviser of the US Department of State, Harold Hongju Koh, and the EU Counter-Terrorism Coordinator, Gilles de Kerchove. The second part of the event consisted of focused discussions introduced by academics and clustered around four big themes: terrorist blacklisting, definitions of terrorism, detention, trial and the role of criminal law in the fight against terrorism, and finally the positions of the EU and the US in relation to counter-terrorism and the role of Islam.
Terrorism and human rights: a case study in impending legal realities*
Legal Studies, 1999
This article critically appraises the UK government's recently published Consultation Paper on the future of the anti-terrorism laws. The author considers the likely effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on the impact of any legislation that might flow from the government's proposals. The interaction between human rights law and anti-terrorism legislation provides a useful case study of the likely effects of incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights into domestic law. The author argues that many of these effects have not been anticipated by the drafters of the anti-terrorism proposals, with the result that many of their suggested changes to the law will be vulnerable to legal challenge if not sharply modified before enactment. The author concludes by considering the likelihood that, over time, successive governments will learn to tailor their legislation to the requirements of the Convention, even in the anti-terrorism field, but that in the short-term a period of ...