peter.a.kiss on "Rendition and democracy: civil society’s role"

peter.a.kiss — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 20:45:31 +0000

For several years the US has been under low intensity armed attack. The country's enemies have been prosecuting the conflict by the methods of fourth generation warfare: non-state actors (rootless private organizations and individuals with no apparent affiliation) carry out low-intensity operations; no uniforms; no organized, identifiable military units; terrorism; no Hague, no Geneva, no generally accepted rules of warfare.

What is the US to do? Meekly accept, that domestic and international law have failed to keep in step with developments in warfare? The Westfalian system (warfare is an affair between nation-states; it is a state monopoly and state responsibility) has fallen apart - should the US wait, until something replaces it?

The people subject to rendition are mostly rather nasty individuals. Yes, mistakes will be made. And if the first mistakes go for the big money with high profile lawsuits, there will be fewer mistakes released alive later.

A US jurist (either Goldberg or Jackson) said something to the effect that the Bill of Rights had not been intended as a suicide pact. Those, who attack its foundations cannot expect very seriously that it will be their defense.

Rendition and democracy: civil society's role, Aziz Huq

Wed, 06 Dec 2006 00:00:00 +0000

The system of transferring prisoners seized in the "war on terror" between secret locations around the world involves a new form of transnational injustice. Civil society must catch up, says Aziz Huq of the Brennan Center for Justice. Read the rest of this post...

open Democracy News Analysis - Rendition and democracy: civil society's role, Aziz Huq - Comments

peter.a.kiss on "Rendition and democracy: civil society’s role"

Rendition and democracy: civil society's role, Aziz Huq