Deadline nears for ASIL Helton Fellowships

asil_logoThe American Society for International Law is accepting applications for its 2015 Helton Fellowships. The Helton Fellowship Program, established in 2004, recognizes the legacy of Arthur C. Helton, an ASIL member who died in the August 19, 2003, bombing of the UN mission in Baghdad. Helton Fellowships provide financial assistance in the form of “micro-grants” for law students and young professionals to pursue field work and research on significant issues involving international law, human rights, humanitarian affairs, and related areas.
Applications are due this Monday, January 19, 2015, and only the first 50, fully complete applications will be considered. This is a fantastic opportunity for students and new  professionals to further their career in international law.
Details here or by e-mailing fellowship@asil.org.

Specifics on Palestine accession bids

note

Given the conflicting and imprecise* dispatches on reports that Palestine seeks to join a raft of treaties including the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the item above, just posted on the U.N. media website, is welcome. It states in full:

Notes to correspondents
Note to Correspondents in response to questions on documents submitted by the Permanent Observer of Palestine

New York, 2 January 2015

In response to questions, the Spokesman had the following to say about Palestinian submission of documents:

The Permanent Observer of Palestine to the United Nations in New York has transmitted to the Secretariat copies of documents relating to the accession of Palestine to 16 international conventions and treaties in respect of which the Secretary-General performs depositary functions. These include the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The original versions of these documents were delivered on 1 January 2015 to the Deputy Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative of the Secretary-General to the PLO and the PA. The documents are being reviewed with a view to determining the appropriate next steps.

 

* E.g., it has not been possible to “sign” the Rome Statute since Israel and the United States became the last 2 states to do so, on Dec. 31, 2000. Both of those latter (and with them, Sudan) later attempted to “unsign,” an act previously unknown to international law. None of the three has since ratified.

“How can I face a child today knowing what I know?”: Angry plea to end violence

UntitledIt is the season of renewal, of anticipating the year to come. It is a time for revelry, but also for reflection. And reflection on this past year forces one to confront the grim reality of harms humans have wreaked upon other humans – on women, men, and children.

It is this last group of victims on which I have focused, in my service as International Criminal Court Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda‘s Special Adviser on Children in and Affected by Armed Conflict. Bensouda’s office has worked this year to  prepare a Policy Paper on Children, and this year the ICC Appeals Chamber sustained the court’s first conviction, against a militia leader responsible for child-soldiering crimes. But this year also saw untold crimes against children – not only tragically quotidian crimes of domestic abuse, but also spectacular outrages like last week’s lethal attack on a school in Pakistan, and the several instances of girls’ abduction or enslavement by groups like ISIS and Boko Haram.

It is this last group of victims, moreover, that this year spurred digital artist Corinne Whitaker to publish “Cradle Song,” an online book featuring images and poetry that she created. (As I’ve posted, Whitaker is the longtime publisher of a monthly webzine, Digital Giraffe, as well as the sister of colleague Ed Gordon.)

“Cradle Song” features pages of images like the one above, juxtaposed with verse-form text. “How can I face a child / today / knowing what I know?” it begins, then continues with angry, taut descriptions of what she knows – of, that is, the awful ways that armed violence affects children. Her refrain of questions – among them, “Why doesn’t someone / anyone / care?” – reminds us that we do, we must, care. And in this time of renewal, we must resolve to act.

Dean Rusk on Cold War US-Cuba relations

In his statement on easing U.S.-Cuba relations, John F. Kerry said yesterday:

‘I look forward to being the first Secretary of State in 60 years to visit Cuba.’

rusk2The comment got me thinking who might’ve been the last Secretary of State to make an official visit. Perhaps Dean Rusk (bust at right), who served from 1970 to 1984 on the Georgia Law faculty, and is the namesake of a Georgia Law building, as well as its 37-year-old Dean Rusk Center for International Law & Policy?

Well, no. Kerry’s reference to “60 years,” plus the timeline of events in Cuba–it was in February 1959 that Fidel Castro became Cuba’s Prime Minister–point to John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State during much of the Eisenhower administration.

Still, there’s much to be gained by reading Rusk on Cuba. His tenure included U.S. entrenchment of policies against Cuba, undertaken as part of a larger policy aimed at containing Soviet communism. (That larger policy led to Rusk’s subsequent, controversial role in escalation and maintenance of the U.S.-Vietnam War.)

► Rusk’s State Department succeeded in persuading the Organization of American States to expel Cuba from taking part in inter-American affairs–a 1962 exclusion that remained in place till 2009.

► Rusk was part of the Executive Committee, or ExComm, that helped President John F. Kennedy find a way out of the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 (indeed, Rusk is sometimes credited with arranging the promised withdrawal of U.S. missiles in Turkey, a key component in the defusing of that crisis).

► And it was on Rusk’s watch that the United States aided exiles’ unsuccessful 1961 invasion of Castro’s Cuba. “The Bay of Pigs disaster was one hell of a way to close out my first hundred days as secretary of state,” he wrote at pages 216-17 of As I Saw It (1991), the memoir he co-authored with his son. According to the son, Richard Rusk (pp. 196-97):

‘Rusk privately opposed the abortive Bay of Pigs operation. “I knew it wouldn’t work … But I served President Kennedy very badly. … I didn’t oppose it forcefully. … I was too busy sitting on my little post of responsibility.”‘

Dean Rusk wrote of his surprise over eventual disclosures of CIA efforts to assassinate Castro. He did cite other plots, of which he was apprised (p. 216):

‘Following the Bay of Pigs, the CIA tried harassing Cuba with various dirty tricks. I vetoed some as being foolish or unproductive. For example, the CIA once proposed contaminating shipments of Cuban sugar with a chemical to render the sugar inedible by the time it reached foreign ports. I thought that was just damned nonsense.’

On other countries’ reaction to the Bay of Pigs debacle, Dean Rusk wrote (p. 216):

‘I have always marveled that the Bay of Pigs fiasco did not inflict greater damage upon the Kennedy administration than it did. We survived that episode better than we had any right to expect. The international community and the United Nations could have really nailed the United States for violating international law. But most governments were sorry that we had failed; regret, not outrage, seemed to mark their reaction.’

This instance of “violating international law” had at least one consequence, Rusk wrote: in the year following the Bay of Pigs, the Kennedy administration placed a greater emphasis on constructing “[t]he legal case” supporting the U.S. response to the Cuban Missile Crisis (p. 233).

Concluding his memoir, Dean Rusk suggested that the Cold War was nearing its end, that “events now seem to be moving toward the West” (p. 616). More than 2 decades have passed since his words were published. It is only now, with President Barack Obama’s announcement on Cuba yesterday, that there appears to be movement toward the Cold War’s final thaw.

After Senate committee’s Torture Report, U.S. must pursue 3 accountability pillars

torturereportThis week has marked the 66th anniversaries of 2 watersheds: on Tuesday, the U.N. General Assembly’s adoption of the 1948 Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and on Wednesday, the same assembly’s adoption of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Together, they form 2 essential pillars of post-World War II human rights and human security.

This week also marked the release, on Tuesday, of the 524-page executive summary of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency’s Detention and Interrogation Programa study that, in full, spans 6,000 pages.

I was honored by an invitation to contribute my thoughts on the release of this so-called Torture Report to The New York Times‘ online Room for Debate forum, and so on Tuesday published an op-ed entitled “Officials Must Be Held Responsible for Torture.” Joining me in this forum were Hina Shamsi of the American Civil Liberties Union, Danielle Pletka of the American Enterprise Institute, Georgetown Law Professor David Luban, and Texas Law Professor Robert Chesney.

My own op-ed referred to structures of accountability common in the international arena; that is, truth commissions or commissions of inquiry. In this context, I saw the committee report as a step toward establishment of an historical record, yet advocated the pursuit of two additional pillars of accountability: a comprehensive analysis of aimed at reforming laws and institutions that permitted torture to occur, and Department of Justice investigation of the matter, with prosecutions to follow as appropriate. With regard to the latter, I wrote:

‘And those prosecutions must occur in courts of the United States. If they do not, indictments of Americans by other countries, or by international tribunals, must be expected.’

As a consequence of that op-ed, yesterday I joined American University Law Professor Steve Vladeck and Security Studies Professor Sebastian Gorka of the National Defense University, on a live segment of the Al Jazeera English program “Inside Story,” hosted by Ray Suarez. No public link’s available; suffice it to say that the spirited discussion included my reiteration of the need for 3-pillar accountability, as indicated below:

Crimes against children cited in ICC Prosecutor’s preliminary examinations

As I wrote in an article published last year, “the fate of children in armed conflict has formed a cornerstone of the ICC‘s early jurisprudence.” That article focused on the 1st case tried by the International Criminal Court — Prosecutor v. Lubanga, a case that ended Monday with the Appeals Chamber’s affirmance (available here) of Trial Chamber judgments convicting and sentencing a Congolese ex-militia leader for conscripting, enlisting, and using children under 15 to participate actively in hostilities.

The statement has a wider application, however. Child-soldiering crimes also were pursued, albeit unsuccessfully, in the next trial, Katanga and Ngudjolo. And a case set for trial next year, Ntaganda, involves not only those crimes, but also charges that the accused ex-leader was responsible for sexual abuse that his troops perpetrated against children under fifteen in the same militia. (New IntLawGrrls post on latter case here.)

reportThere is evidence that this focus will remain an ICC cornerstone, moreover. One example is the ongoing process, in which I am honored to take part, of preparing an ICC Office of the Prosecutor Policy Paper on Children. Another is the 64-page Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2014, which the Office of the Prosecutor released Tuesday. The Report indicated that crimes against children form a part of the analysis in at least 4 of the 9 pending preliminary examinations, as follows:

Afghanistan: Still under examination are allegations that children have been recruited for and used in armed violence. (¶¶ 81, 89, 97) A doubling of casualties involving children is another stated concern. (¶ 83) Finally, there is the matter of harm done to girls:

‘A second potential case against the Taliban relates to attacks on girls’ education (i.e., female students, teachers and their schools). The Taliban allegedly target female students and girls’ schools pursuant to their policy that girls should stop attending school past puberty. The Office has received information on multiple alleged incidents of attacks against girls’ education, which have resulted in the destruction of school buildings, thereby depriving more than 3,000 girls from attending schools and in the poisoning of more than 1,200 female students and 21 teachers. While the attribution of specific incidents to the Taliban, and in particular the Taliban central leadership remains challenging, there is a reasonable basis to believe that the Taliban committed the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against buildings dedicated to education, cultural objects, places of worship and similar institutions.’

¶ 87; see also ¶ 88. (David Bosco‘s just-published Foreign Policy article on a different aspect of the Afghanistan examination is here, while Ryan Goodman‘s Just Security post on same is here, and Ryan Vogel‘s Lawfare post is here.)

Colombia: The report reiterated a prior finding of “a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes under article 8 of the Statute have been committed … including … conscripting, enlisting and using children to participate actively in hostilities” in violation of Article 8(2)(e)(vii) of the ICC’s Rome Statute. (¶ 109)

Central African Republic: With respect to a matter that moved from preliminary examination to situation under investigation during the course of this year, Office reported a reasonable basis to believe that the same 3 war crimes — conscription, enlistment, and use — had been committed by Séléka, an armed group that staged a coup in the country in 2012, as well as by the opposition anti-balaka. (¶¶  204, 205)

Nigeria: Again, attacks against girls appear to be on examiners’ radar, as indicated by ¶  178:

‘The abduction by the group of over 200 girls from a government primary school in Chibok, Borno State on 14-15 April 2014 has drawn unprecedented international attention to the Boko Haram insurgency.’

As noted at ¶  187, Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda condemned the abduction soon after it occurred, in a statement that, like others she has made recently (see here and here), underscores that the Office’s attention not just to child-soldiering, but also to the full range of crimes against children.