Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T18:20:08.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Remarks by Jennifer Trahan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2021

Jennifer Trahan
Jennifer Trahan*
Affiliation:
Clinical Professor, NYU Center for Global Affairs.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Thank you for having me on this esteemed panel. My first two sets of comments are based on views articulated in my book, published by Cambridge University Press, Existing Legal Limits to Security Council Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes. The third set of comments responds to remarks by other panelists.

Type
Responding to Atrocity Crimes and the Security Council's Veto Power: Implications, Realities, and the Future
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 114 , 2020 , pp. 337 - 340
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The American Society of International Law.

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.)

Footnotes

This panel was convened at 3:30 p.m., Friday, June 26, 2020, by its moderator Elizabeth Wilson of Rutgers Law School, who introduced the panelists: Ana Peyro Llopis of the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs; Adama Dieng, UN Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide; Jennifer Trahan of New York University Center for Global Affairs; and Monica Shahanara of the Permanent Mission of Bangladesh to the United Nations.

References

1 https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/existing-legal-limits-to-security-council-veto-power-in-the-face-of-atrocity-crimes/7EB9A13B1DE4F573CE29CEA6D3DFF936. Please refer to the book for details as to the legal arguments; these remarks provide only a very brief summary of them.

2 Vetoes fifteen and sixteen were cast subsequent to the ASIL meeting.

3 Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Serb. and Montenegro), Judgment, 2007 ICJ Rep. 43 (Feb. 26).

4 Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, 2004 ICJ Rep. 136, para. 158 (July 9).

5 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicar. v. U.S.), 1986 ICJ Rep. 14, para. 220 (June 27).

6 Commentary of 2016, Convention (1) for the Amelioration of the Conditions of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, discussing Article 1.