This paper is written as an effort to escape the dialogue of the deaf between those who believe that international law can do no wrong in the war on terrorism and those who argue its utter irrelevance. It argues that international law can be seen as a tool for governance of the suspended space between war and peace, characteristic of the so-called war on terror. Through the case of the terrorist blacklist administrated by the UN's 1267 Committee, it shows how administrative law, and not the law of war, is the paradigm of the international legal order within antiterrorist policy. International law, then, is not to be read as a matter of rights, but as a legal form, which features independent agency. It is in the legal form and its design, and not in the current obsession with compliance, where the possibilities of resistance in this new time exist.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Uruena: International Law as Administration
Rene Uruena (Univ. of Helsinki) has posted the abstract for International Law as Administration: The UN's 1267 Sanctions Committee and the Making of the War on Terror (International Organizations Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract: