Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface to the second edition
- Preface to first edition
- Select table of cases
- Select table of treaties
- Select Table of resolutions, reports and other sources
- Select list of abbreviations and acronyms
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Terrorism and responsibility
- Part II Responding to terrorism: legal framework and practice
- 4 Criminal justice
- 5 The use of force
- 6 International humanitarian law
- 7 International human rights law
- Part III Case Studies
- Select bibliography
- Index
- References
6 - International humanitarian law
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 April 2015
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Preface to the second edition
- Preface to first edition
- Select table of cases
- Select table of treaties
- Select Table of resolutions, reports and other sources
- Select list of abbreviations and acronyms
- 1 Introduction
- Part I Terrorism and responsibility
- Part II Responding to terrorism: legal framework and practice
- 4 Criminal justice
- 5 The use of force
- 6 International humanitarian law
- 7 International human rights law
- Part III Case Studies
- Select bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
I observed that men rushed to war for slight causes or no causes at all, and that when arms have once been taken up there is no longer any respect for law, divine or human; it is as if, in accordance with a general decree, frenzy had openly been let loose for the committing of all crimes
(Hugo Grotius, 1625)The war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped, and defeated.
(G.W. Bush, 2001)We must define the nature and scope of this struggle, or else it will define us.
(B. Obama, 2013)Discussions around the scope and nature of IHL have dominated legal discourse in the ‘war on terror’. Whether this attention is deserved, or represents an overstretching of the notion of ‘war’ and with it an inflation of the relevance of IHL, is a matter of considerable dispute. IHL applies to particular conduct carried out in association with an ‘armed conflict’ as understood under IHL. Undoubtedly a critical preliminary matter, on which the nature of applicable law depends, is whether, when and where operations aimed at counter-terrorism form part of an armed conflict properly so called. Beyond disputes concerning the applicability of IHL are other myriad questions regarding its interpretation and application, and even the adequacy of a legal framework often impugned post-9/11 as ill equipped to address a ‘new war’ against a new enemy.
This chapter seeks to set out the legal framework as it currently governs the conduct of states and non-state parties to armed conflicts. Part A of the chapter – which sketches out the legal framework of IHL – will begin with the law that defines whether there is an armed conflict, if so what sort of conflict, and when it begins and ends. This will be followed by a summary of specific provisions of the legal framework of IHL, in relation to who may be targeted, lawful methods and means of warfare and humanitarian protections that are relevant to terrorism and action against terrorism in such armed conflicts.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The ‘War on Terror' and the Framework of International Law , pp. 344 - 455Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015
References
, ‘The “New Wars” Thesis Revisited’, in and (eds.), The Changing Character of War (Oxford, 2011), p. 109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v. The Government of Israel, HCJ 769/02, Israeli Supreme Court, 14 December 2006
, ‘Armed Conflict and Terrorism: There is a (Big) Difference’, in , and (eds.), Counter-Terrorism: International Law and Practice (Oxford, 2012), pp. 171–204Google Scholar
See Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, 8 July 1996, ICJ Reports 1996, p. 226
, ‘Scope of Application of Humanitarian Law’, in (ed.), The Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflict (Oxford, 1995), pp. 39, 44Google Scholar
Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case No. IT-94–1-AR72, ICTY Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction (Appeals Chamber), 2 October 1995
, ‘Towards the Unification of International Humanitarian Law’, in: , and (eds.), International Conflict and Security Law (Cambridge, 2005), pp. 108–28)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Case No. ICC-01/04–01/06, Judgment, ICC, 14 March 2012
, ‘The UN Commission of Inquiry on Lebanon: A Legal Appraisal’, 5 (2007) Journal of International Criminal Justice1039 at 1042–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case No. IT-94–1-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 15 July 1999
UK Ministry of Defence, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, section 3.3.1 (Oxford, 2005)
and (eds.), 27th Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian Law: International Humanitarian and Other Legal Regimes. Interplay in Situations of Violence (Mulan, 2005)
, ‘Non-International Armed Conflict’, in (ed.), The Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts (Oxford, 1995)Google Scholar
, ‘International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts’, 30th Annual Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, October 2007, available at: (hereinafter, ‘ICRC Report on IHL and Contemporary Armed Conflicts’)Google Scholar
Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, Case No. ICC-01/04–01/06, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 29 January 2007 at para. 234
, ‘Conflict Classification and the Law Applicable to Detention and the Use of Force’, ICRC, in (ed.), International Law and the Classification of Conflicts (Oxford, 2012)Google Scholar
See Prosecutor v. Limaj et al., Case No. IT-03–66-T, Judgment, 30 November 2005
Prosecutor v. Milošević, Case No. IT-02–54-T, Decision on Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, 16 June 2004
, ‘Protection of the Civilian Population’, in (ed.), Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts (Oxford, 1995), pp. 209, 221Google Scholar
‘The territorial jurisdiction of the International Tribunal for Rwanda shall extend to the territory of Rwanda … as well as to the territory of neighbouring States in respect of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed by Rwandan citizens.’ Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, SC Res. 955 (1994)
, ‘The Yugoslavia Tribunal and the Common Core of International Humanitarian Law Applicable to All Armed Conflict’, 13 (2000) LJIL619, 630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martens Nouveau Recueil (Series 3) 461, in force 26 January 1910
See also Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company Ltd (Belgium v. Spain), Second Phase, ICJ Reports 1970, p. 32
Prosecuter v. Kupreškic et al., Case No. IT-95–16-T, ICTY, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 14 January 2000
Prosecutor v. Martić, Case No. IT-95–11-A, Decision, 8 October 2008 at para. 111
jus cogens, see Prosecutor v. Delalić et al., IT-96–21-A, ICTY, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 20 February 2001, at para. 143
Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania), Merits, ICJ Reports 1949, p. 4
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, ICJ Reports 1986
Prosecutor v. Kordić and Čerkez, Case No. IT-95–14/2-PT, Decision on the Joint Defence Motion to Dismiss the Amended Indictment, 2 March 1999, at para. 30
, ‘Use of Lethal Force against Suspected Terrorists’, in , and (eds.), Counter-Terrorism: International Law and Practice (Oxford, 2012), p. 638Google Scholar
, ‘Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions’, Study on Targeted Killings, Human Rights Council, UN Doc. A/HRC/14/24Add.6, 28 May 2010, p. 10Google Scholar
and , ‘The ICRC Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities Under International Humanitarian Law: An Introduction to the Forum’, 42 (2010) New York University Journal of International Law and Politics637Google Scholar
, ‘Keeping the Balance between Military Necessity and Humanity: A Response to Four Critiques of the ICRC’s Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities’, 42 (2010) New York University Journal of International Law and Politics831Google Scholar
, ‘Opportunity Lost: Organized Armed Groups and the ICRC “Direct Participation in Hostilities” Interpretive Guidance’, 42 (2010) New York University Journal of International Law and Politics641Google Scholar
, ‘Deconstructing Direct Participation in Hostilities: The Constitutive Elements’, 42 (2010) New York University Journal of International Law and PoliticsGoogle Scholar
, ‘Part IX of the ICRC “Direct Participation in Hostilities” Study: No Mandate, No Expertise, and Legally Incorrect’, 42 (2010) New York University Journal of International Law and PoliticsGoogle Scholar
, The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed Conflict (Cambridge, 2010), 2nd edn., p. 172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , Constraints on the Waging of War: An Introduction to International Humanitarian Law, ICRC (Cambridge, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Direct Participation in Hostilities and 21st Century Armed Conflict’, in , et al. (eds.), Crisis Management and Humanitarian Protection: Festschrift für Dieter Fleck (Berlin, 2004), pp. 505–9Google Scholar
, ‘Attacking the Enemy Civilian as a Punishable Offense’, 7 (1997) Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law. 539Google Scholar
, ‘The Value of the 1977 Geneva Protocols for the Protection of Civilians’, in (ed.), Armed Conflict and the New Law. Aspects of the 1977 Geneva Protocols and the 1981 Weapons Convention (London, 1989), pp. 137Google Scholar
See also Prosecutor v. Blaškić, Case No. IT-95–14-T, ICTY, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 3 March 2000
‘Long After the Air Raids, Bomblets Bring More Death’, Guardian, 28 January 2002, available at:
, ‘Classification of Armed Conflict in the Former Yugoslavia: Nicaragua’s Fallout’, 92 (1998) AJIL236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Protection of Prisoners of War’, in (ed.,), The Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts (Oxford, 1995), p. 321Google Scholar
, International Humanitarian Law: The Regulation of Armed Conflict (Dartmouth Publishing Co. Ltd, 1990), pp. 89–108Google Scholar
, ‘International Humanitarian Law: An Introduction’, in (ed.), Humanity for all: the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (Berne, 1993), p. 22Google Scholar
, ‘Protection of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked’, in (ed.), The Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts (Oxford, 1995), pp. 293, 294Google Scholar
Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 9 July 2004 at, paras. 123–131
and , ‘The Juridical Status of Privileged Combatants under the Geneva Protocol of 1977 Concerning International Conflicts’, 42 (1978) Law and Contemporary Problems4, 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Article 8. War Crimes’, in (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Baden-Baden, 1999), p. 173Google Scholar
, The International Committee of the Red Cross as Guardian of International Humanitarian Law (Geneva, 1998)Google Scholar
and (eds.), 27th Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian Law and other Legal Regimes. Interplay in Situations of Violence, 2003
, ‘Harmony or Conflict? The Interplay between Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Fight Against Terrorism’, in and (eds.), Counterterrorism Strategies in a Fragmented International Legal Order: Meeting the Challenges (Cambridge, 2013)Google Scholar
, ‘Executive Order: Interpretation of the Geneva Convention Common Article 3 as Applied to a Program of Detention and Interrogation Operated by the Central Intelligence Agency’, Executive Order 13440, July 20, 2007, available at: Google Scholar
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 US 557 (2006)
‘The [Obama] administration has stopped using the phrase and I think that speaks for itself’, Reuters, 30 March 2009, available at:
, ‘The End of the Global War on Terror’, The Washington Post, March 24, 2009, available at: Google Scholar
‘Goodbye, Good Riddance to the Global War on Terror’, Globe and Mail, September 7, 2011 at:
, ‘Remarks by the President on National Security’, The White House Office of the Press Secretary, May 21, 2009, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘“Unlawful/Enemy Combatants”: Interpretations and Consequences’, in and (eds.), International Law and Armed Conflict: Exploring the Faultlines (London, 2007), p. 341Google Scholar
Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 US 557, 630 (2006)
and , ‘Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: The Functional Case for Foreign Affairs Deference to the Executive Branch’, Constitutional Commentary, 23 (2006), p. 111Google Scholar
, ‘Revisiting Hamdan v. Rumsfeld’s Analysis of the Laws of Armed Conflict’, 21 Emory International Law Review 601 (2007), 607–8Google Scholar
Eminent Jurists Panel, ‘Report of the Eminent Jurists Panel on Terrorism, Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights: Assessing Damage, Urging Action’, International Commission of Jurists, 2009, retrieved from
, ‘Security and Rights’, Crown Prosecution Service, 23 January 2007, available at: last visited 6 December 2012Google Scholar
, Attorney-General from 2001 to 2007, ‘Justice and the Rule of Law’, 43 International Lawyer 27 (2009), 29Google Scholar
, ‘Opinion on the International Legal Obligations of Council of Europe Member States in Respect of Secret Detention Facilities and Inter-State Transport of Prisoners’, Venice Commission 66th Plenary Session, 17–18 March 2006, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Armed Conflict with Al Qaida?’, Opinio Juris, 15 January 2007 at, para. 9, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Beyond the War on Terror: Towards a New Transatlantic Framework for Counterterrorism’, European Council on Foreign Relations, May 2009, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘PM Fillon says France “at war” with al Qaeda’, Reuters, 27 July 2010, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Classification of Conflicts’, in (ed.), International Law and the Classification of Conflicts (Oxford, 2013), 2nd edn, p. 424Google Scholar
Ajouaou and Others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department SC/10/2002, United Kingdom, Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC), 29 October 2003 available at
, ‘War on Terror – Armed Conflict with Al Qaeda?’, 78(4) (2009) Nordic Journal of International Law, p. 508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘Transnational Armed Groups and International Humanitarian Law’, HPCR Occasional Paper Series, Winter 2006, No. 6, p. 10, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Worsens Terrorism Threat’, The New York Times, September 24, 2006, available at: US 2010 NSS, pp. 21–2Google Scholar
and , ‘French Gunman Seen as Homegrown Militant’, The New York Times, March 21, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Some Reflections on the International Legal Framework Governing Transnational Armed Conflicts’, 15(2) Journal of Conflict & Security Law (15 July 2010) 8Google Scholar
‘America and al Qaeda: The Killing of Osama bin Laden’, The Economist, 2 May 2011, available at:
, ‘Pakistan’s Sovereignty and the Killing of Osama bin Laden’, 5(11) ASIL Insights, 5 May 2011, p. 2, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Targeted Killing and Drone Warfare: How We Came to Debate Whether there Is a Legal Geography of War’, Hoover Institution Online Volume Essay ‘Future Challenges’, SSRN Working Paper Version April 26, 2011, pp. 3–15Google Scholar
Al-Aulaqi v. Obama, 727 F.Supp. 2d 1 (DDC. 2010) (No. 10 Civ. 1469)
, ‘The Boundaries of the Battlefield’, Opinio Juris, 15 May 2011 at para. 5, available at:Google Scholar
, ‘Qatar Court Convicts 2 Russians in Top Chechen’s Death’, The New York Times, July 1, 2004, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Russia’s New Counteracting Terrorism Law: The Legal Implications of Pursuing Terrorists beyond the Borders of the Russian Federation’, 3 (2009) Columbia Journal of East European Law1Google Scholar
, ‘Global Counterinsurgency: Strategic Clarity for the Long War’, Parameters, Autumn 2008, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Afghanistan 2001–2010’, in (ed.), International Law and the Classification of Conflicts (Oxford, 2012), p. 242Google Scholar
‘Al Qaeda’s Diminished Role Stirs Afghan Troop Debate’, Wall Street Journal, October 5, 2009, available at:
, ‘Legal Issues in Forming the Coalition’, in (ed.), The War in Afghanistan: A Legal Analysis, 85 (2009), US Naval War College International Law Studies, p. 146Google Scholar
, ‘Iraq (2003 Onwards)’, in (ed.), International Law and the Classification of Conflicts (Oxford, 2012), p. 356Google Scholar
Al-Skeini v. The United Kingdom, No. 55721/07, ECHR Grand Chamber, Judgment, 7 July 2011
, quoted in , ‘Outsourcing Torture: The Secret History of America’s “Extraordinary Rendition” Program’, The New Yorker, February 8, 2005
, ‘Sow What You Reap? Using Predator and Reaper Drones to Carry Out Assassinations or Targeted Killings of Suspected Islamic Terrorists’, 44 (2012) George Washington International Law Review243, 253Google Scholar
, ‘Unlawful Killing with Combat Drones; A Case Study of Pakistan, 2004–2009’, in (ed.), Shooting to Kill: Socio-Legal Perspectives on the Use of Lethal Force (Oxford, 2012)Google Scholar
‘A Defense of Drones’, Editorial (Anonymous), Wall Street Journal (Eastern Edition), April 2, 2010, p. A.16
‘larger and more powerful than the MQ-1 Predator’. US Air Force, ‘MQ-9 Reaper’, January 5, 2012, available at:
‘US Building Secret Drone Bases in Africa, Arabian Peninsula’, The Washington Post, September 20, 2011, available at: (reporting new bases in Africa and the Arabian Peninsula)
, ‘Mapping America’s Shadowy Drone Wars’, Tom Dispatch, October 16, 2011
and , ‘RAF “Relying” on Drones in Afghanistan Guardian’, The Guardian, 7 February 2010, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Secret Panel can Put Americans on “Kill List”’, Reuters, 5 October 2011, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Dozens of Americans Believed to have Joined Terrorists’, Washington Times, June 24, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
The Bureau of Investigative Journalism (TBIJ), an independent journalist organisation, reports that available data indicate that drone strikes killed 2,562–3,325 people in Pakistan from June 2004 through mid-September 2012
and , ‘Washington’s Phantom War: The Effects of the US Drone Program in Pakistan’, The Council on Foreign Affairs, July/August 2011, available at: Google Scholar
‘Obama Maintains NATO Drone Strike that Killed 24 Pakistani Soldiers was not Deliberate … but Stops Short of Offering Apology’, Daily Mail, 5 December 2011, available at:
, and , ‘Two-Year Manhunt Led to Killing of Awlaki in Yemen’, The New York Times, September 30, 2011, available at: Google Scholar
and , ‘Anwar al-Awlaki’s Family Speaks Out against his Son’s Death in Airstrike’, The Washington Post, October 17, 2011
TBIJ puts Yemen casualties since 2002 at between 362 and 1,052 (reported) with between 53 and 63 confirmed US operations in Yemen over this time. See last visited 5 December 2012
‘Qaeda Leader Says Somalia’s Shabaab Joins Group’, Reuters, 9 February 2012, available at:
and , ‘Qaeda Leader Reported Killed in Somalia’, The New York Times, May 2, 2008
, ‘Afghanistan War Logs: Task Force 373 – Special Forces Hunting Top Taliban’, Guardian, 25 July 2010, available at: Google Scholar
‘Secret Kill List Tests Obama’s Principles and Will’, The New York Times, June 29, 2012, available at:
, ‘Unmanned Drones could be Banned, says Senior Judge’, Telegraph, 6 July 2009, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Bin Laden: The Rules of Engagement’, The New Yorker, May 4, 2011
, Extraterritorial Use of Force against Non-State Actors (Oxford, 2010), p. 225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘“Who May Be Killed?”, Anwar al-Awlaki as a Case Study in the International Legal Regulation of Lethal Force’, Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 13. et al. (eds.), 2011Google Scholar
‘Drones Wars and State Secrecy – How Barack Obama became a Hardliner’, Guardian, 2 June 2012, available at:
, ‘At CIA, a Convert to Islam Leads the Terrorism Hunt’, The Washington Post, March 24 2012, available at: Google Scholar
‘US Offered Advanced Warnings, Limits for Drone Strikes’, The Tribune, March 27, 2012, available at:
, and , ‘US Tightens Drone Rules’, Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2011, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘CIA Is Disputed on Civilian Toll in Drone Strikes’, The New York Times, August 11, 2011, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘US Drone Strikes in Pakistan: Can it be Legal to Target Rescuers & Funeralgoers?’, EJIL Talk, 12 February 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘The Predator War: What are the Risks of the CIA’s Covert Drone Program?’, The New Yorker, October 26, 2009, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Pakistani MPs say US Drone Strikes must End before Relations Improve’, Guardian, 20 March 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Pakistan Seeks End to Drones’, The Wall Street Journal, March 20, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘What Happens if Afghanistan Shuts Down the US Drone Program There?’, The Atlantic, December 9, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
and , The New York Times, May 29, 2012
, ‘Secret US Memo Made Legal Case to Kill a Citizen’, The New York Times, October 8, 2011, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Why Is President Obama Keeping a Journalist in Prison in Yemen?’, The Nation, March 13, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Drone Strike Prompts Suit, Raising Fears for US Allies’, The New York Times, January 30, 2013
‘Drone Killing Debate: Germany Limits Information Exchange with US Intelligence’, Der Spiegel, 27 May 2011
‘Indonesia: Police Kill 5 Suspects in Terrorist Ring’, The New York Times, March 20, 2012, available at:
, ‘Philippine Officials Say Raid Killed Militants’, The New York Times, February 2, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
and , ‘Global Race on to Match US Drone Capabilities’, The Washington Post, July 4, 2011, available at: Google Scholar
‘US Bounty Scheme Targets Terrorist’, Forbes, February 21, 2008, available at:
‘US/INTERNATIONAL: Counter-Terror Bounties’, The New York Times, December 5, 2008, available at:
, ‘Philippine Officials Say Raid Killed Militants’, The New York Times, February 2, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Out of the Shadows, Preventative Detention, Suspected Terrorists and War’, 97 (2009) California Law Review, 693, 727Google Scholar
, ‘“Who May Be Held?” Military Detention Through the Habeas Lens’, 52 (2011) Boston College Law Review, 769, 770Google Scholar
US Supreme Court Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 US 507, 519 (2004)
Obama, Executive Order 13492, January 22, 2009
See Al-Bihani v. Obama, Al-Bihani II, 590 F.3d 866 (D.C. Cir. 2010)
, ‘Procedural Principles and Safeguards for Internment/Administrative Detention in Armed Conflict and Other Situations of Violence’, 87(858), (2005) International Review of the Red Cross (hereinafter, ‘ICRC Minimum Guidelines’)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Jedda v. United Kingdom, Appl. No. 27021/08, Judgment, ECtHR, 7 July 2011
, ‘The European Court of Human Rights’ Al-Jedda Judgment: The Oversight of International Humanitarian Law’, 93(883) (2011) International Review of the Red Cross837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, ‘This War Is Not Over Yet’, International Herald Tribune, February 15, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Did NATO Forces Commit War Crimes during the Kosovo Conflict? Reflections on the Prosecutor’s Report of 13 June 2000’ in , and (eds.), International and National Prosecution of Crimes under International Law: Current Developments (Berlin, 2001), pp. 505, 516–30Google Scholar
, ‘US/NATO Targeting of Afghan Drug Traffickers: An Illegal and Dangerous Precedent?’, EJIL Talk, 13 September 2009, available at: Google Scholar
and , ‘Battling Drugs in Afghanistan: Order to Kill Angers German Politicians’, Der Spiegel, 29 January 2009, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘NATO High Commander Issues Illegitimate Order to Kill’, Der Spiegel, 29 January 2009, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘The United States’ Use of Drones in Pakistan’, EJIL Talk, 29 September 2009, available at: Google Scholar
‘Afghanistan Civilian Casualties’ Guardian, 12 April 2013 at:
and , ‘An Afghan Comes Home to a Massacre’, International Herald Tribune, March 12, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Afghan Protests Over the Burning of Korans at a US Base Escalate’, International Herald Tribune, February 22, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘US Transfers Control of Night Raids to Afghanistan’, International Herald Tribune, December 8, 2012, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Afghanistan War Logs: How US Marines Sanitised Record of Bloodbath’, Guardian, 4 March 2007, available at: Google Scholar
‘US Deploys Controversial Weapon’, Guardian, 12 October 2001, available at:
, ‘Long After the Air Raids, Bomblets Bring More Death’, Guardian, 28 January 2002, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Ends and Means in Politics: International Law as Framework for Political Decision-Making’, in and (eds.), September 11, 2001: A Turning Point in International and Domestic Law (New York, 2005), pp. 25–84Google Scholar
‘America’s Shame’, Guardian, 1 May 2004, available at:
and , ‘Prisoner Abuse Probe Widened: Military Intelligence at Center of Investigation’, The Washington Post, May 2, 2004, available at: Google Scholar
‘British Personnel Reveal Horrors of Secret US Base in Baghdad’, Guardian, 1 April 2013 available at:
‘High Court Challenge over Iraqi Civilian Deaths’, Guardian, 28 July 2004, available at:
, ‘CIA Accused of Torture at Baghram Base’, Guardian, 27 December 2002, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Amnesty Criticizes US for Afghan Deaths’, Associated Press, November 30, 2003
, ‘Afghan Prisoners Beaten to Death at US Military Interrogation Base. “Blunt Force Injuries” Cited In Murder Ruling’, Guardian, 7 March 2003, available at: Google Scholar
, ‘Rights on the Rack. Alleged Torture in Terror War Imperils US Standards of Humanity’, Los Angeles Times, March 6, 2003Google Scholar
, ‘US Military Investigating Death of Afghan in Custody’, The New York Times, 4 March, 2003, available at: Google Scholar
‘Slow Death on the Jail Convoy of Misery,’ Daily Telegraph, 19 March 2002, available at:
and , ‘Alliance Accused of Brutality in Capture of Kunduz’, Guardian, 27 November 2001, available at: Google Scholar
and , ‘Hundreds of Pakistanis Believed Massacred’, Guardian, 13 November 2001, available at: Google Scholar
and , ‘Interrogation Memos Detail Harsh Tactics by the CIA’, The New York Times, April 17, 2009, available at: Google Scholar
‘The War (?) against al Qaeda’, in (ed.), International Law and the Classification of Conflicts (Oxford, 2012), p. 451CrossRef
US Justice Department response to the habeas motion of al Bakri, September 8, 2008
, ‘Conclusions’, in (ed.), International Law and the Classification of Conflicts (Oxford, 2012), pp. 499–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar