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
- Part III Case Studies
- 8 Case study I: Guantánamo Bay detentions under international human rights and humanitarian law
- 9 Case study II: Osama bin Laden – ‘justice done’?
- 10 Case study III: extraordinary rendition
- 11 The role of the courts: human rights litigation in the ‘war on terror’*
- 12 Conclusion
- Select bibliography
- Index
- References
12 - Conclusion
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 April 2015
- 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
- Part III Case Studies
- 8 Case study I: Guantánamo Bay detentions under international human rights and humanitarian law
- 9 Case study II: Osama bin Laden – ‘justice done’?
- 10 Case study III: extraordinary rendition
- 11 The role of the courts: human rights litigation in the ‘war on terror’*
- 12 Conclusion
- Select bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
It is of course acknowledged that international law is not an exact science, but it surely does not have to appear as bizarre as some of its practitioners have made it appear in recent months?
(Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale (Parliamentary Debates, Hansard, 17 March 2003))Any sacrifice of freedom or the rule of law within States – or any generation of new tensions between States in the name of anti-terrorism – is to hand the terrorists a victory that no act of theirs alone could possibly bring.
(Secretary-General Kofi Annan (Statement to the Security Council Ministerial Meeting on Terrorism, 20 January 2003))Since 9/11, the agenda of the international community has been shaped, and perhaps dominated, by the fight against terrorism. Preceding chapters have explored in detail particular areas of the relevant international legal framework, alongside particular responses to international terrorism post-9/11. This concluding chapter considers this practice as a whole, reflecting on certain overarching characteristics of the ‘war on terror’ and its approach to international legality. It then considers the legal framework itself, and the extent to which the experience of terrorism and counter-terrorism have indicated – as some have asserted – gaps and inadequacies in the law, or led to a transformative shift in the international legal order. It suggests that there are no gaping holes in that framework, while highlighting pockets of legal development, tensions and areas where the law may yet be subject to development. The chapter ends by questioning the longer-term implications of the ‘war on terror’ for the rule of law.
9/11: tragedy, opportunity and the ‘war on terror’ response
9/11 was an international tragedy. It was a crime under international law and, as the Security Council promptly determined, a threat to international peace and security. It was followed by widespread, perhaps unprecedented, expressions of international solidarity with the US. The Security Council expressed its willingness to act, and for the first time in history, NATO asserted the right of collective self-defence. States and institutions committed their shared determination to cooperating more effectively to combat terrorism and to hold to account those responsible.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The ‘War on Terror' and the Framework of International Law , pp. 900 - 937Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2015