The Killing of Osama bin Laden: Voices Point Out the Problem of Being above International Law
Will the killing of the suspect Osama bin Laden by America be viewed as being above international law? If the killing is thought of as a military operation in the battlefield, it may be written up as part of a larger plan — done as an act of war. However, it can also be interpreted as a state "assassination" that targeted an individual, and so there are voices questioning America's conduct.
This killing was done in Pakistan, whose own sovereignty counts for little, and America claims the military operation was executed under the cooperation of Pakistani authorities.
However, opinions diverge on whether it is possible to say that the target was hit as a combatant, and whether he was killed on the battlefield as part of an act of war. Professor Pierre d’Argent of the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium said about this point: "Originally, he was supposed to be captured alive. Whether it will be written up as a killing disregarding international law is complicated."
University of Amsterdam Associate Professor Jean d’Aspremont also pointed out, "Hereafter, it is necessary to verify whether America’s actions were in accordance with all international humanitarian legal procedures."
Professor Chikako Taya, who works at a law and politics college and worked as a judge at the U.N. International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, indicated that there is clearly a problem: "For America, if it concerns a dangerous character, it has unfortunately become acceptable to kill anyone."
For the sake of argument, even if the suspect bin Laden had been captured, it would have been difficult to try him as an individual at the International Criminal Court with a charge of a crime against humanity. America, under the pretext of concern over political ramifications, has not joined the ICC treaty.
There was the alternative that the U.S. could have judged him in a special military tribunal at the American military base in Guantanamo, Cuba. But such a legal process also would have had gaps, and that courtroom also would have been the subject of a politically divisive debate.
The international community has forever lost the chance to obtain testimony from the mastermind behind the black curtain of 9/11.
(Jun Nojima reporting from Brussels)
This killing was done in Pakistan, whose own sovereignty counts for little, and America claims the military operation was executed under the cooperation of Pakistani authorities.
However, opinions diverge on whether it is possible to say that the target was hit as a combatant, and whether he was killed on the battlefield as part of an act of war. Professor Pierre d’Argent of the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium said about this point: "Originally, he was supposed to be captured alive. Whether it will be written up as a killing disregarding international law is complicated."
University of Amsterdam Associate Professor Jean d’Aspremont also pointed out, "Hereafter, it is necessary to verify whether America’s actions were in accordance with all international humanitarian legal procedures."
Professor Chikako Taya, who works at a law and politics college and worked as a judge at the U.N. International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, indicated that there is clearly a problem: "For America, if it concerns a dangerous character, it has unfortunately become acceptable to kill anyone."
For the sake of argument, even if the suspect bin Laden had been captured, it would have been difficult to try him as an individual at the International Criminal Court with a charge of a crime against humanity. America, under the pretext of concern over political ramifications, has not joined the ICC treaty.
There was the alternative that the U.S. could have judged him in a special military tribunal at the American military base in Guantanamo, Cuba. But such a legal process also would have had gaps, and that courtroom also would have been the subject of a politically divisive debate.
The international community has forever lost the chance to obtain testimony from the mastermind behind the black curtain of 9/11.
(Jun Nojima reporting from Brussels)