27 September 2017, 18:00-19:30
Geneva Academy Wednesdays
So-called ‘targeted killings’ and drone strikes remain some of the most controversial aspects of U.S. counterterrorism policy. Despite a number of reforms and efforts at greater transparency in the latter years of the Obama Administration, one enduring criticism is that secrecy and lack of accountability for such operations has hindered the ability of other branches of government, the public, and the international community to exercise effective oversight and verify the legality of U.S. actions, and prevented the ability of victims to obtain redress.
Reports of increased civilian casualties in Iraq and Syria, increased strikes and raids in Yemen, a proposed loosening of the rules on the use of force, uncertainty over the CIA’s role in ‘targeted killings’, and the acquisition of armed drones by an increasing number of governments make these concerns more relevant and urgent than ever.
In a recent report entitled ‘Out of the Shadows’, the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic and the Sana’a Center for Strategic Studies comprehensively analyse 15 years of U.S. counterterrorism strikes. The report presents a new framework for transparency against which government’s can be assessed.
This Geneva Academy Wednesday will bring together the authors of the report and others to discuss and evaluate past U.S. practice, analyse recent developments, assess the Trump Administration’s approach to the use of force, transparency, and accountability, and the lessons that can be drawn from this analysis for other states.
Sandra Kraehenmann, Research Fellow, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights
Tom Gal, Teaching Assistant, Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights
Waleed Alhariri, Director of the U.S. Office, Sana’a Center for Strategic Studies, lead author of the report.
John Borrie, Chief of Research at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR)
Adriana Edmeades, Legal and Policy Director, Rights Watch (UK).
Alexander Moorehead, Lecturer-in-Law at Columbia Law School and the Director of the Counterterrorism, Armed Conflict and Human Rights Project at Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Institute, lead author of the report.
Geneva Academy Wednesdays (GAW) are a platform coordinated by Geneva Academy researchers and teaching assistants to foster debate and discussion between academics and practitioners on different aspects of international law or international relations.
Geneva Academy, Villa Moynier, 120B Rue de Lausanne, Geneva
Tram 15, tram stop Butini
Bus 1 or 25, bus stop Sécheron
Villa Moynier is accessible to people with disabilities. If you have a disability or any additional needs and require assistance in order to participate fully, please email info[at]geneva-academy.ch
In 2016, 49 situations of armed violence amounted to armed conflicts according to international humanitarian law and international criminal law. The vast majority are non-international armed conflicts, as in preceding years, highlighting the changing nature of warfare. The analysis highlights two trends: the heavy toll of current armed conflicts on civilians often trapped in sieges and battlefields in cities and increased international interventions in conflicts.
Our Academic Platform on Treaty Body Review 2020 held on 20–21 July its fourth regional consultation in Nairobi, Kenya, in partnership with Strathmore University Law School and the Universities of Nairobi and Pretoria.
Social media companies have stepped up efforts to spot hate speech as well as ‘terrorist’ and ‘violent extremist’ content, thereby becoming the de facto regulators of online content.
This course discusses the extent to which states may limit and/or derogate from their international human rights obligations in order to prevent and counter terrorism and thus protect persons under their jurisdiction.
This course focuses on the specific issues that arise in times of armed conflict regarding the respect, protection and fulfilment of human rights. It addresses key issues like the applicability of human rights in times of armed conflict; the possibilities of restricting human rights under systems of limitations and derogations; and the extraterritorial application of human rights law.
This project, initiated in 2014 by the Swiss Chair of International Humanitarian Law, Professor Noam Lubell, intends to identify, via expert meetings and research, a set of best practices that states should apply when they investigate or examine alleged violations or misconduct in situations of armed conflict.
This research project looked at the reactions to norms of more than 30 armed groups worldwide.