on extra-judicial killing. I don't believe reports issued by U.N. bodies have the force of international law. You will note that the Geneva Conventions require voluntary consent of the signatory nations in order to be binding.
In this and
every case, one must be able to cite the source of the authority when claiming that the "law" has been broken. In this case, the language in a U.N. report is not "law".
Extrajudicial executions are unlawful, even in armed conflict. In a 1998 report, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions noted that “extrajudicial executions can never be justified under any circumstances, not even in time of war.” The U.N. General Assembly and Human Rights Commission, as well as Amnesty International, have all condemned extrajudicial executions.
http://www.truth-out.org/targeted-assassination-osama-bin-laden/1305051197P.S. It must remain clear that my analysis isn't a defense (or support) of extra-judicial killing. It becomes tiresome to be attacked for applying an honest analysis of an issue. When one hires a lawyer, you don't attack him for telling you that x,y,z strategy is not sound legally; you pay him handsomely for the information! So too here (though I am not holding myself out as a lawyer deserve pay for my analysis--I merely make an analogy.) You can say, "Cheney, Cheney. CHENEY!" like you expect Betelgeuse to appear, if you like. I'm trying to argue this issue based on basic legal interpretation, not based on various appeals to authority and ad hom attacks.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
