27 September 2017, 18:00-19:30
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 event 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.
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
We added nine military occupations to our Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts (RULAC) online database. Visitors can discover them either by browsing the map or by browsing conflicts per types or regions.
Our Rule of Law in Armed Conflict (RULAC) online portal provides a detailed analysis and legal classification of the non-international armed conflict (NIAC) between Nigeria and Boko Haram, a non-state armed group that pledged allegiance to the Islamic State group.
This short 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 short course discusses the protection offered by international humanitarian law (IHL) in non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) and addresses some problems and controversies specific to IHL of NIACs, including the difficulty to ensure the respect of IHL by armed non-state actors.
This research aims at building a common understanding and vision as to how states and the relevant parts of the UN system can provide a concrete and practical framework to address human rights responsibilities of armed non-state actors.
Several ad hoc fact-finding and inquiry commissions have been established to assess some of the most serious situations of human rights and humanitarian law violations across the world. With such mechanisms gaining influence, the question arises of whether a minimum formal standard of proof (or degree of certainty) exists or is required when such bodies adjudicate on such serious matters.