Upper Level Writing Requirement (Law School)

(Law Review Format)

+++Human Rights & Terrorism Seminar+++

In the aftermath of the September11, 2001 attacks in the United States, many government officials and policy makers in the US and other liberal democracies, such as Britain, claimed that the rules had changed and that it was unrealistic to uphold well-established human rights norms in responding to this new global threat. These and many other states began hastily to introduce, both overtly and covertly, new counter-terrorism measures and policies which, according to human rights treaty bodies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), violated core human rights in the name of countering terrorism. This research seminar examines the impact that key laws and policies adopted in the US and other countries after the 9/11 attacks have had globally on the rule of law, international human rights and, where applicable, international humanitarian law, (the law of armed conflict). Among the topics that students will explore are: Can respect for human rights actually assist counter-terrorism efforts? Are past experiences with terrorism relevant to the contemporary terrorist threat? Should terrorist suspects ever be subjected to torture? What are the significance and consequences of the US=s AWar on Terror@? Have the enhanced powers of intelligence services world-wide and intelligence sharing contributed to serious human rights violations, such as torture? What impact have counter-terrorism measures had on the civilian justice system? Should military or special courts try terrorist suspects? The assigned reading are global in scope, drawing on cases from, inter alia, the US, the United Kingdom and human rights treaty bodies, such as the European Court of Human Rights, and the reports and publications of Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists and other respected NGOs.

II. Grading Policy

Requirements for this seminar is a 35-page paper. The paper should be double-spaced in 12-point Times New Roman font and 1-inch margins. Footnotes should conform to The Blue Book: A Uniform System of Citation (19th edition).

III. Topic/Thesis:

The incessant abuse of discretion by the Executive Branch regarding the use mercenaries in Iraq and Afghanistan has in turn spawned ineffectual and futile enforcement mechanisms surrounding private military and security companies directly participating in the battlefield during war.
There is no legal vacuum surrounding the increasing presence of PMSCs on battlefields: states are responsible for the conduct of PMSCs which therefore become subject to international humanitarian law. The major concern is in fact “the status, rights, and obligations of PMC employees” in the respective domestic legal frameworks of these countries: PMSCs “often enjoy immunity in the countries where they operate, and their prosecution in their home countries is still not as well-regulated as prosecution involving members of regular armed forces. In Blackwater Case, Court Rejects a Murder Conviction and Voids 3 Sentences.

The Issues with PMSC Principal Immunity:
Strict Regulations and Legislation Premised on International Cooperation

Abstract: Dealing with PMSC Principal Immunity: Strict Regulations and Legislation Premised on International Cooperation
Reliance on private military and security companies (“PMSCs”) for the provision of security and military services to states, international organizations, and multinational corporations (Avant, 2009, 104) increased dramatically in the aftermath of the Cold War. These PMSCs have become important tools in returning order and stability to conflict-affected areas by assisting national and multinational security forces even in un peace operations (Avant, 2005: 8). During the last decade of the 20th century, more than one hundred PMSCs were known to have operations in over one hundred countries around the world.
This industry is also financially lucrative. By 1990, the PMSC market generated an estimate of $55.6 billion in total annual revenues. (Holmqvist, 2005: 1-7). “Recent estimates show that the PMSC market is worth about US 100-165 billion per year, and that it has been growing at an annual rate of 7–8 per cent” (Florquin, 2011: 103). Small Arms Survey recently published a study on the booming business of security privatization in 70 countries. That research found that the total personnel employed today by private security companies “exceeds the number of police officers at the global level” (Florquin, 2011: 101): while PMSCs employed 19,545,308 individuals, the number of police officers was only 10,799,059.
Yet, holding these companies and their employees accountable for their actions and omissions in peace and war times represents an even greater challenge since regulations are scarce, and, as of today, not legally binding. Given the nature of the industry, human rights concerns are at the forefront of opposition to PMSCs. Specifically, PMSCs directly involved in combat activities are at risk of violating a plethora of human rights laws. Depending on the assignment, employees of PMSCs can be involved in genocide, crimes against humanity, assassinations and murder. All of these actions fall under the province of international humanitarian law.
Discuss Blackwater the company generally
Discuss questionable actions committed by employees of Blackwater
Human Rights Violations
Discuss how no one was held accountable