Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Chapter 1 Introduction: understanding global procedural justice
- Part I Procedural rights and Magna Carta's legacy
- Part II Habeas corpus and 'jus cogens'
- Part III Deportation, outlawry, and trial by jury
- Chapter 8 Collective punishment and mass confinement
- Chapter 9 Non-refoulement and rendition
- Chapter 10 The right to be subject to international law
- Part IV Security and global institutions
- Bibliography
- Index
Chapter 8 - Collective punishment and mass confinement
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgements
- Chapter 1 Introduction: understanding global procedural justice
- Part I Procedural rights and Magna Carta's legacy
- Part II Habeas corpus and 'jus cogens'
- Part III Deportation, outlawry, and trial by jury
- Chapter 8 Collective punishment and mass confinement
- Chapter 9 Non-refoulement and rendition
- Chapter 10 The right to be subject to international law
- Part IV Security and global institutions
- Bibliography
- Index
Summary
This chapter will act as a bridge between discussions of habeas corpus on the one hand and the other Magna Carta legacy rights on the other hand. Due process rights are normally discussed in the context of particular prisoners who are in detention while awaiting trial or who have been sentenced. But some refugee camps should also be treated as forms of detention, even incarceration. And the detention or confinement is itself especially problematic given its link to collective punishment. In such cases those procedural rights that have been recognized as fundamental since the time of Magna Carta are in need of special protection not commonly recognized. In this chapter I want to consider the relationship between collective responsibility and collective punishment by considering mass confinements of such people as those in detention while waiting extradition and those people who are forced into refugee camps.
Collective responsibility plays a prominent role in the supposed justification of detention imposed upon groups when some of its members pose security threats and it is hard to sort out who poses serious threats versus those who merely might do so. The US used this rationale for incarcerating large numbers of people found on the “battlefield” in Afghanistan and for sending them to prison in Guantanamo. And when the civil war in the Sudan reached a certain tipping point, large numbers of people were punished by being forced into refugee camps. I examine both sorts of arguments, finding them to be seriously flawed. I will look to the debates in the Just War tradition and contemporary international law for guidance.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Global Justice and Due Process , pp. 145 - 163Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2010