In this chapter, I explore the relationship between international law and domestic legal systems in the counterterrorism area, with a particular focus on the United Nations Security Council’s (UNSC’s) promulgation of relevant legal obligations. The chapter critically examines some ways in which international criminal law may accommodate ‘terrorism’, along with its more important shortcomings in doing so, and canvasses key developments regarding States’ counterterrorism obligations since 9/11. Then, I investigate the viability of expanding the International Criminal Court’s jurisdiction to encompass ‘crimes’ of ‘terrorism’, along with the prospect of UNSC referrals to that court involving terrorism-related cases. In critically analysing ground-breaking UNSC resolutions imposing wide-ranging counterterrorism duties on States, I shed light on that organ’s ‘quasi-legislative’ exercise of its powers and the implications for the implementation of those obligations in domestic law. Building on this foundation, the chapter briefly turns to an analysis of how these duties are implemented and enforced in domestic settings, with emphasis on Australia, Canada, and Singapore. My ambition is to show that international counterterrorism obligations remain painstakingly dependent on States’ national security policies. Ultimately, I argue that it might be more helpful to embrace a broader conception of international criminal law, as an effective global counterterrorism campaign can only be pursued meaningfully through what I term a ‘transnational network of criminal and civil law’.
Wednesday, September 5, 2018
Proulx: Counterterrorism and National Security: The Domestic/International Law Interface
Vincent-Joël Proulx (National Univ. of Singapore - Law) has posted Counterterrorism and National Security: The Domestic/International Law Interface (in The Politics of International Criminal Law, Holly Cullen, Philipp Kastner & Sean Richmond eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract: