ICRC. (2014, April 4th). The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. Retrieved from International Committee of the Red Cross: http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-0173.pdf In Boumediene v, Bush, No. 06–1195 (United States Supreme Court December 5th, 2007). In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, No. 03—6696 (United States Spureme COurt June 28th, 2004). Mortlock, D. (2010, July 1st). Definite Detention: The Scope of the President's Authority to Detain Enemy Combatants. Ebsco Host, pp. 375-404. School
Nathan McNichols 10/20/14 1. Title and Citation Hamdi v. Rumsfeld 542 U.S. 507 (2004) http://laws.findlaw.com/US/542/507.html 2. Facts of the Case Yaser Esam Hamdi was captured, during the hostilities ensuing the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, in Afghanistan by military forces acting on behalf of the United States. The government of the United States asserted that Hamdi was an “enemy combatant”, and, as such, could be held indefinitely under the provisions of the Authorization of Military
War powers refers to the powers exercised by Congress or the president during times of war or other crises affecting national security. Article 2, Section 2 of the US Constitution declares that the president is the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. He may direct the military after an official declaration of war from Congress. There is a lot of disagreement and confusion about what exactly the president has the power to do under the Constitution. The purpose of this paper
country. The organization was founded between 1988 and 1989 and its intent was to promote the use of Jihad as a tactic to create profound global instability and allow the implementation of sharia law. In a case similar to Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld a former
War crimes have been difficult to define with accuracy and its usage has evolved constantly. Before World War II, war crimes were generally accepted as horrors of the nature of war. However, with millions of people murdered and the mistreatment of prisoners of war, the allied powers were prompted to prosecute perpetrators. Thus, the international humanitarian law was implemented. The international humanitarian law (IHL) regulates the conduct of forces when engaged in war or armed conflict
Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, were used in previous administrations. The techniques were considered at the very least to be cruel and inhuman. Among these are attention strikes and stress positions. The techniques violate human rights as well as detainee rights. There are few serious arguments for the retention of enhanced interrogation. The most compelling is the "ticking time bomb theory." This theory is in fact based on logical fallacy. An executive order has banned the use of enhanced interrogation
INTRODUCTION It is well known that international humanitarian law (the “IHL”) and International Human Rights Law (the “IHRL”) are two distinct disciplines. In recent years, however, the relationship between IHL and HRL has become very controversial. The interaction between IHL and IHRL raises a number of difficulties; however this was not always the case. Prior to the introduction of the UN Charter, a State had to make a declaration of war before engaging in armed conflict. As a result there was