Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T23:49:43.964Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Detention, Judicial Review of Detention, and Due Process During Prosecution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Jordan J. Paust
Jordan J. Paust*
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Legal Responses to Terrorism: Security, Prosecution, and Rights
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 97 , 2003 , pp. 13 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 UN GAOR, 21st Sess., Supp. No. 16, at 52, art. 9(1), A/6316 (1966), 999 UNTS 171 (entered into force Mar. 23, 1976).

2 Id.

3 See, e.g., UN Human Rights Comm., General Comments No. 29, paras. 11, 15-16, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.l/Add.11 (2001); UN Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 24, paras. 8, 11-12, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev. l/Add.6 (1994) ; UN Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 20, para. 15, UN Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.l/Add.3 (1992);UN Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 15, paras. 1-2, 7, UN Gaor, 41st Sess., Supp. No. 40, Annex VI, at 117, UN Doc. A/41/40 (1986); UN Human Rights Comm., General Comment No. 13, paras. 1-4; UN Gaor, 39th Sess., Supp. No. 40, at 143, UN Doc. A/39/40 ( 1984) ; see also Dubai Petroleum Co. v. Kazi, 12 S.W.3d 71, 82 (Tex. 2000) (“The Covenant not only guarantees foreign citizens equal treatment in the signatories’ courts, but also guarantees them equal access to these courts.”).

4 See General Comment No. 29, supra note 3, para. 11 ; General Comment No. 24, supra note 3, para. 16.

5 Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties Under Article 40 of the Covenant, Human Rights Committee, 63rd Sess., 1694th mtg., para. 21,UNDoc. CCPR/C/79/Add.93 (1998), available at <http://domino.un.org>.

6 General Comment No. 29, Human Rights Committee, para. 16, UN Doc. CCPR/C.21/Rev.l/Add.ll (2001), available at <http://www.unhchr.ch>.

7 See Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency, Advisory Opinion OC-9/87, Ser. A, No. 9 ( Inter-Am. Cit. H.R., Oct. 6, 1987); Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations, Advisory Opinion OC-8/87, Ser. A, No. 8 at paras. 35, 38, 41-42 (Inter-Am. Ct. H.R., Jan. 30, 1987) (“habeas corpus and... ‘amparo’ are among those judicial remedies that are essential for the protection of various rights,” essential judicial guarantees necessary to guarantee various rights), available at <http://www.oas.org>.

8 See Castillo Petruzzi Case, Merits, Judgment, Ser. С, doc. 52 (Inter-Am. Ct. H.R., May 30, 1999).

9 See Protection of War Victims—Prisoners of War, opened for signature Aug. 12, 1949, art. 4, 6 UST 3316, 75 UNTS 135.

10 See Protection of War Victims—Civilian Persons, opened for signature Aug. 12, 1949, 6 UST 3516, 75 UNTS 287.

11 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 1125 UNTS 3 (entered into force Dec. 7, 1978), available at <http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/93.htm>. Concerning individual status and relevant rights to due process guaranteed by these treaties and customary international law, see, e.g., Jordan Paust, J., Antiterrorism Military Commissions: Courting Illegality, 23 Mich. J. Int’l L. 1, 5n.l5, 11-18 (2001)Google Scholar [hereinafter Antiterrorism No. 1]; Paust, Jordan J., Antiterrorism Military Commissions: The Ad Hoc Dod Rules of Procedure, 23 Mich.J. Int’l L. 677, 678-90 (2002)Google Scholar.

12 Geneva Civilian Convention, supra note 10, arts. 5, 42.

13 Id., arts. 5, 78.

14 See Paust, Antiterrorism No. 1, supra note 11, at 7 n.15, 12 n.26.

15 Detention, Treatment and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War against Terrorism, 66 Fed. Reg. 57,833 (Nov. 13, 2001).

16 Id. at 57, 834.

17 See Castillo Petruzzi Case, supra note 4.

18 General Comment No. 13, on Article 14, Human Rights Committee, 21st Sess., para. 4 (1984), available at <http://wwwl.umn.edu/humanrts/gencomm/hrcoml3.htm>.

19 U.S. Dep’t of Defense, Military Comm’n Order No. 1, Procedures for Trials by Military Commission of Certain Non-United States Citizens in the War Against Terrorism (Mar. 21, 2002), at para. 4(A) (2)-(4), available at <http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2002/d20020321ord.pdf>.

20 Id., para. 4(A)(3).

21 Id., para. 6(D)(1).

22 Id., para. 4(C)(4).

23 See id., paras. 4(c)(3), 6(B)(3), 6(D)(5).

24 See Paust, supra note 11, at 688-89.

25 See DOD Order, supra note 19, para. 5(1).

26 Id., para. 6(D)(2)(a).

27 Id., para. 6(D)(2)(d), 6(D)(3).

28 See, e.g., Covenant, supra note 19, art. 14(3)(e).

29 See DOD Order, supra note 19, para. 6(H)(4).

30 Id.

31 Id., para. 6(H)(2), 6(H)(5)-(6).

32 Id.