Even if torture was efficient, it would be prohibited

With the releasing of CIA torture report the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism  says that the US attorney general is under a legal duty to bring criminal charges against those responsible. How do you perceive this report in the framework of international law, what kind of consequences it might, should have? Read few comments.

Continue reading

MH-17’s UNSC resolution: Will it change anything?

Regarding MH-17 flight we have now UNSC resolution calling for independent international investigation. From the legal point of view how does this change the situation, if anyhow? Read few comments.

Continue reading

Shootdown of MH-17 from the international law point of view

Regarding shootdown of MH-17 flight let’s say there are basically 2 scenarios. 1. State, means Russia or Ukraine did it. 2. Non-state actor – rebels – with some support of Russia did it. What could be the international reaction in terms of international law? Read few comments.

Continue reading

Putin in correct. Is he also right?

Russian President  Vladimir Putin said: I would like to draw your attention to one absolutely key aspect: In line with international law, only the U.N. Security Council can sanction the use of force against a sovereign state. Any other pretext or method which might be used to justify the use of force against an independent sovereign state is inadmissible and can only be interpreted as an aggression.

Continue reading

Is President Bush vulnerable to prosecution abroad?

The Centre for Constitutional Rights believes President George Bush approved torture when he approved enhanced interrogation techniques  and the organization said all signatories to the convention on torture “are obligated to prosecute or extradite for prosecution anyone present in their territory they have a reasonable basis for believing has committed torture”.

Continue reading

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,924 other followers