Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T01:18:51.736Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rules of Evidence for the Use of Force in International Law’s New Era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2017

Mary Ellen O’Connell
Mary Ellen O’Connell*
Affiliation:
Notre Dame Law School
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
The Laws of Force and the Turn to Evidence
Information
Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting , Volume 100 , 2006 , pp. 44 - 47
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2006

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 See Orford, Anne, The Gift of Formalism, 15 Eur. J. Int’l L. 179 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Brower, Charles N. Evidence Before International Tribunals: The Need for Some Standard Rules, 28 Int’L L. 47 (1994)Google Scholar.

3 Lobel, Jules, The Use of Force to Respond to Terrorist Attacks: The Bombing of Sudan and Afghanistan, 24 Yale J. Int’l L. 537, 538 (1999)Google Scholar.

4 Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo, Judgment (Dem. Rep. Congo v. Uganda) (Int’l Ct. Justice Dec. 19, 2005).

5 Available at <http://www.pca-cpa.org>.

6 The remainder of this section is adapted from Mary Ellen, O’Connell, Evidence of Terror, 7 J. Conf. & Sec. L. 19 (2002)Google Scholar.

7 Trail Smelter (U.S. v. Can.), 3 R.I.A.A.1905, 1963-1965 (1941) (emphasis added).

8 Velasquez Rodriguez v. Honduras, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C), No. 4, at para. 127 (July 29, 1988).

9 Shelton, Dinah, Judicial Review of State Action by International Courts, 12 Fordham Int’l L. J. 361 (1989)Google Scholar.

10 Greenwood, Christopher, International Law and the United States’ Air Operation Against Libya, 89 W. Va. L. Rev. 933, 935 (1987)Google Scholar.

11 Lobel, supra note 3, at 547 (emphasis added).

12 Henkin, Louis, How Nations Behave: Law And Foreign Policy 142 (2d ed. 1979)Google Scholar.

13 See Excerpts from Daily Press Briefing by Department of State Deputy Spokesman Foley, Aug. 26, 1998, available at <http://www.secretary.state.gov> (emphasis added).

14 Daniel Benjamin & Steven Simon, A Failure of Intelligence?, N.Y. Rev. of Books, Dec. 20, 2001, 78 (emphasis added).

15 In Review, The Year Gone By, L.A. Times, Jan. 4, 1994.

16 William Tuohy, U.S. Pressing Allies on Libya Chemical Plant, L.A. Times, Jan. 3, 1989.

17 Schweid, Barry, State Department Revives Terrorism Charges Against Syria, Associated Press, Jan. 12, 1988.Google Scholar

18 Tuohy, supra note 16.

19 Richard Perle, Next Stop, Iraq, Nov. 30, 2001, available at <http://www.fpri.org> (Perle regrets force was not used).

20 Dana Milbank & Vernon Loeb, U.S. Response Portrayed as Calm, Methodical; Powell: Evidence Against Bin Laden Will Be Produced, Wash. Post, Sept. 24, 2001.

21 William Drozdiak & Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Nato: U.S. Evidence on Bin Laden “Compelling”; Allies Give Unconditional Support for Retaliatory Strikes; Taliban Official Asks to see Proof, Wash. Post, Oct. 3, 2001.

22 For further development of this latter issue, see O’Connell, Mary Ellen, Affirming the Ban on Harsh Interrogation, 66 Ohio St. L.J. 1231 (2005)Google Scholar.