The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School is a leader in the study of the law and policy around the Internet and other emerging technologies.
This paper maps the range of war crimes being committed in Syria with reference to the applicable treaty and customary international law and prospects for prosecution. It begins by presenting the international legal framework employed to determine when an armed conflict began in Syria, how this conflict is classified under international law, and which multilateral treaties and customary rules are operative. This framework underlies the determination of which war crimes can be prosecuted, which tribunals might have jurisdiction, and which perpetrators may be made subject to indictment.
Tilburg University - Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT); Tilburg Law and Economics Center (TILEC); Stanford University - Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society
March 4, 2016
Although much work has been done on applying the law of warfare to cyber attacks, far less attention has been paid to defining a law of cyber peace applicable below the armed attack threshold. Among the most important unanswered questions is what exactly nations’ due diligence obligations are to one another and to the private sector, as well as how these obligations should be translated into policy.
This is a contribution to a feshrift devoted to Professor William Schabas. It takes as its starting point President Obama's atrocities prevention and response initiative, a key product of which has been a concerted inter-agency effort to improve the United States' ability to prosecute atrocity crimes by closing gaps in our penal and immigration codes and preventing this country from serving as a safe haven for abusers.
The commission of mass atrocities — genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes — inevitably generates clarion calls for accountability from a range of international actors, including civil society organizations, governments, and United Nations bodies. These demands often center on an appeal that the situation be taken up by the International Criminal Court (ICC) via a Security Council referral or action by the Prosecutor herself. Although the ICC is now fully operational, its jurisdiction remains incomplete and its resources limited.