Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Judicial Decisions Involving Questions of Public International Law

  • Published:
Netherlands International Law Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Executive Order on Detention, Treatment and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism, 13 November 2001, available at <www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/11/20011113-27.html>(accessed 10 January 2007).

  2. Pub. L. No. 109–366, 120 Stat. 2600.

  3. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 344 F.Supp.2d. 152 (DDC 2004).

  4. Ex parte Quirin, 317 US 1 (1942).

  5. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 415 F.3d 33 (DC Cir. 2005).

  6. HR 2836, Title X.

  7. Schlesinger v. Councilman, 420 US 738 (1975).

  8. Quirin, supra n. 4.

  9. Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579, 637 (1952).

  10. See The Paquette Habana, 175 US 677 (1900).

  11. See, e.g., H.H. Koh, ‘Setting the World Right’, 115 Yale LJ (2006) p. 2350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. See, e.g., C. Krauthammer, ‘Emergency Over, Saith the Court’, The Washington Post, 7 July 2006, p. A17.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Yoo and J. Ku, ‘Hamdan v. Rumsfeld: The Functional Case for Foreign Affairs Deference to the Executive Branch’, 23 Constitutional Commentary (2006) p. 179.

    Google Scholar 

  14. This is reflected in the dicta of Breyer J, concurring, that ‘[n]othing prevents the President from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary’ (p. 2799).

  15. See Kennedy J, concurring in judgment, in Rasul v. Bush in which he held ‘Guantánamo Bay is in every practical respect a United States territory’, 542 US 466, 487 (2004).

  16. In particular Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 US 244 (1994); Republic of Austria v. Altmann, 541 US 677 (2004); Bruner v. United States, 343 US 112, 116–117 (1952).

  17. On the significance of this element of the judgment see further F. de Londras, ‘In the Shadow of Hamdan: Habeas Corpus Rights of Guantánamo Bay Detainees’, 17(2) Irish Criminal LJ (2007) p. 8.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 US 426 (2004) holding that Padilla’s habeas petition could not be heard as it was lodged in the wrong court and against the wrong respondent.

  19. See, e.g., Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 US 507 (2004) in which O’Connor J for the plurality held that the AUMF includes authorisation to detain an individual ‘once it is sufficiently clear that the individual is, in fact, an enemy combatant’ (p. 523).

  20. P.J. Spiro, ‘International Decisions: Hamdan v Rumsfeld’, 100 AJIL (2006) p. 888 at p. 893.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Art. 2 of the Geneva Conventions defines international armed conflict as ‘all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognised by one of them’; the ‘war’ against Al Qaeda can not fall into this definition as Al Qaeda is not a High Contracting Party.

  22. The Geneva Conventions have now achieved universal ratification status, thus practically all territory can be said to count under this definition. The only exception would be any as-yet unclaimed territory, should such a case arise in practice.

  23. 10 USC 47(A) § 948b(b). On 14 February 2007 President Bush released an Executive Order establishing a military commission under the Act — Executive Order: Trial of Alien Unlawful Enemy Combatants by Military Commission, available at <www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/02/20070214-5.html> (14 February 2007).

  24. A. Cassese, International Law, 2nd edn. (Oxford, Oxford University Press 2005) p. 409.

    Google Scholar 

  25. 10 USC 47(A) § 948a(1).

  26. S. 1005(a), Detainee Treatment Act 2005.

  27. 10 USC 47(A) § 948a(1)(ii); The term ‘competent tribunal’ is not defined by the Military Commissions Act.

  28. 10 USC 47(A) § 948d(c).

  29. INS v. St. Cyr, 533 US 289 (2001).

  30. Rasul v. Bush, supra n. 15.

  31. Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 US 763 (1950).

  32. See Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 2006 US Dist. LEXIS 89933 (13 December 2006) discussed infra.

  33. Civilian attorneys may only be used where they have received security clearance for access to information that is classified at the level of ‘Secret’ or higher — 10 USC 47(A) § 949c(3)(D).

  34. 10 USC 47(A) § 949h(a).

  35. 10 USC 47(A) § 948b(f).

  36. 10 USC 47(A) § 948b(g).

  37. Military Commissions Act 2006, s. 5(a).

  38. Military Commissions Act 2006, s. 6(4).

  39. Military Commissions Act 2006, s. 6(3).

  40. 10 USC 47(A) § 950g.

  41. Military Commissions Act 2006, s. 6(a)(2). Cf., C.M. Vasquez, ‘The Military Commissions Act, the Geneva Conventions, and the Courts: A Critical Guide’, 101 AJIL (2007) p. 73.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, supra n. 32.

  43. Ibid., at pp. 7–11; relying on Ex parte Yerger, 75 US (8 Wall.) 85 (1869) and INS v. St. Cyr (supra n. 29).

  44. According to Robertson J ‘Congress’s removal of jurisdiction from the federal courts was not a suspension of habeas corpus within the meaning of the Suspension Clause (or, to the extent that it was, it was plainly unconstitutional in the absence of rebellion or invasion)...’, ibid., at p. 31.

  45. Ibid., at pp. 11–22.

  46. Ibid., at p. 27.

  47. No. 06-1195.

  48. No. 06-1196.

  49. 549 US õ (2007) (cases taken together); 127 S Ct. 1478.

  50. 127 S Ct. 3078; 2007 US LEXIS 8757 (Boumediene); 127 S Ct. 3067; 2007 US LEXIS 8810 (Al Odah).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department and Faculty of Law, University College Cork, Ireland

    Fiona de Londras (Lecturer)

Authors
  1. Fiona de Londras
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fiona de Londras.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Londras, F. Judicial Decisions Involving Questions of Public International Law. Neth Int Law Rev 54, 539–550 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X07005396

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0165070X07005396

Keywords

Search

Navigation