International Law and the Death Penalty

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra L. Babcock
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Norms ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Time Section ◽  
Over Time

Section I of this chapter examines the potential of international law to promote abolition of the death penalty and the challenges that prevent the full realization of that potential. Section II provides a brief overview of how international norms relating to the application of the death penalty have evolved over time. Section III provides three examples of how their impact has been limited in practice, focusing on the application of the death penalty to individuals with mental illnesses and intellectual disabilities, as well as the failure of the United States to comply with its obligations under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Finally, Section IV suggests a number of prescriptive measures to address these limitations. It describes an innovative project in Malawi to obtain the resentencing of prisoners condemned to death and discusses potential revisions to the Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty.

The Role of International Law in United States Death Penalty Cases

2002 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-387
Author(s):  
Sandra Babcock
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Capital Cases ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
Foreign Governments

The United States has repeatedly failed to notify detained foreign nationals of their rights to consular notification and access under Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. In capital cases, US non-compliance with this ratified Treaty has led to litigation by foreign governments and individual lawyers in domestic courts and international tribunals. While these efforts have had mixed results in individual cases, litigation by Mexico, Germany and other actors has led to increased compliance with Article 36, and a growing recognition of the significance of US treaty obligations.

Advanced Introduction to Mental Health Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael L. Perlin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
United States ◽  
General Practice ◽  
Intellectual Disabilities ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The United States ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Legal Scholar ◽  
Dynamic Relationship ◽  
Criminal Matters

Written by esteemed legal scholar Michael L. Perlin, this indispensable Advanced Introduction examines the long-standing but ever-dynamic relationship between law and mental health. The author discusses and contextualises how the law, primarily in the United States but also in other countries, treats mental health, intellectual disabilities, and mental incapacity, giving examples of how issues such as the rights of patients, the death penalty and the insanity defense permeate constitutional, civil, and criminal matters, and indeed the general practice of law.

scholarly journals Pelanggaran Prinsip Persona Grata Atas Penyerangan Duta Besar Ditinjau Dari Perspektif Hukum Internasional (Studi Kasus Penyerangan Duta Besar Amerika Serikat Di Benghazi Libya)

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 63-74
Author(s):  
Desi Yunitasari
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
Injured Party ◽  
The Government ◽  
Legal Consequences

The development of human history has proven that relations between countries are inevitable and are a necessity and often cause conflicts. Along with its development, an unavoidable event is an increase in violations of the provisions of international law, especially with regard to the principle of persona grata where officials or diplomat representatives should get protection when it has been received and placed in the recipient country. As happened in mid-2012 namely regarding the bombing incident carried out through a rocket attack on the United States Embassy (Libya) Office, Libya, in Benghazi City, on September 11, 2012. The attack resulted in the Ambassador and three embassy staff killed. In research that uses normative juridical methods, it is necessary to use secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results on research topics to determine the extent of the legal consequences of the principle of persona grata that has been violated. Based on the results of the study explained that the Libyan Government is responsible for the incident because it fulfills two elements of state responsibility including act or omission that can be imputable to a country, and the act or omission constitutes a violation of an international obligation, especially regarding the principle of persona grata. The Government of Libya as the recipient country is obliged to be responsible based on the 1961 Vienna Convention Article 22 Paragraph (2). As the injured party, the United States can hold the Libyan government diplomatically responsible, namely negotiations, bearing in mind that the benefits of negotiation settlement can be measured in all aspects.

PELANGGARAN PRINSIP PERSONA GRATA ATAS PENYERANGAN DUTA BESAR DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM INTERNASIONAL (STUDI KASUS PENYERANGAN DUTA BESAR AMERIKA SERIKAT DI BENGHAZI LIBYA)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-59
Author(s):  
Desi Yunitasari
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
Recipient Country ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
Injured Party ◽  
The Government ◽  
Legal Consequences

The development of human history has proven that relations between countries are inevitable and are a necessity and often cause conflicts. Along with its development, an unavoidable event is an increase in violations of the provisions of international law, especially with regard to the principle of persona grata where officials or diplomat representatives should get protection when it has been received and placed in the recipient country. As happened in mid-2012 namely regarding the bombing incident carried out through a rocket attack on the United States Embassy (Libya) Office, Libya, in Benghazi City, on September 11, 2012. The attack resulted in the Ambassador and three embassy staff killed. In research that uses normative juridical methods, it is necessary to use secondary data, such as books, laws, and research results on research topics to determine the extent of the legal consequences of the principle of persona grata that has been violated. Based on the results of the study explained that the Libyan Government is responsible for the incident because it fulfills two elements of state responsibility including act or omission that can be imputable to a country, and the act or omission constitutes a violation of an international obligation, especially regarding the principle of persona grata. The Government of Libya as the recipient country is obliged to be responsible based on the 1961 Vienna Convention Article 22 Paragraph (2). As the injured party, the United States can hold the Libyan government diplomatically responsible, namely negotiations, bearing in mind that the benefits of negotiation settlement can be measured in all aspects.

Immigration, Foreign Nationals, and the U.S. Death Penalty

2020 ◽  
pp. 184-195
Author(s):  
Larry Nackerud ◽  
John R. Barner
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Foreign National ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Optional Protocol ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes

This chapter focuses on the interplay between the policy arenas of immigration and the death penalty in the United States. Central to this interplay is the recognition of foreign national rights on U.S. soil—even when individuals stand accused of committing a capital crime such as murder. The authors provide a sociohistorical background of U.S. immigration policy. Specifically, they address the United Nations, the role of the United States in its development, and its promulgated policies protecting human rights; the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, including Article 36; and Optional Protocol Concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. The chapter focuses on Mexican nationals, who represent 13 of 34 foreign nationals executed in the United States since 1976, despite internationally recognized protections. The chapter concludes with a discussion of how the failure of the United States to comply is a clear violation of international human and civil rights standards.

Suspension of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty prior to its withdrawal: the content of custom

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 143-164
Author(s):  
Kazuki Hagiwara
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Nuclear Forces ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Intermediate Range ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Law

The United States suspended the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) ‘in accordance with customary international law’. However, State practice prior to the International Law Commission's codification of the law of treaties did not contribute to clarifying the extent of a right to suspend and the proper conditions for its exercise under customary international law. The few instances regarding suspension due to a serious breach did not demonstrate how the treaties in question were suspended but were a mere reference to a right of suspension in diplomatic or political documents. Against that backdrop, this article seeks to delineate what customary rules the United States believed it was observing and to clarify to what extent those rules are identical to or different from the codified rules on suspension in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (Convention). Because the codified procedural safeguards or the mechanism of acquiescence under Article 65 of the Convention were considered as the progressive development of international law, it appears possible to suspend the INF Treaty unilaterally outside the Convention and under the customary rules by which the United States is bound. The INF Treaty was suspended by the United States and by Russia in sequence. That Russian suspension appears to have been an exceptio non adimpleti contractus to prevent the asymmetric execution of the INF Treaty that had been previously suspended by the United States.

Evolution of Psychiatric Diagnosis

2018 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Carol S. North ◽  
Sean H. Yutzy
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Psychiatric Diagnosis ◽  
Psychiatric Illness ◽  
Medical Model ◽  
The United States ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Diagnostic Process ◽  
Medical Diagnostic ◽  
Washington University ◽  
Over Time

This chapter considers the evolution of psychiatric diagnosis in the United States at length, with references to earlier European contributions. It reviews the medical model in psychiatry movement by the Washington University, St. Louis group in the United States to develop psychiatric diagnosis validity parameters and reliable criteria sets to facilitate communication, research, and clinical application for the major mental illnesses. Challenges to this model are considered and ultimate scientific solidification in DSM-III is reviewed. Over time (33 years), dissent and the continual failure to discover a neurobiological basis for any major psychiatric illness have placed a strain on the medical diagnostic process, and these controversies are reviewed at length. Outlined are the reasons that psychiatry should remain resolute in endorsing what we know scientifically instead of what expert consensus constructs.

scholarly journals War Powers: The Operational Code of Competence

1989 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 777-785 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Michael Reisman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
War Powers ◽  
Operational Code ◽  
Different Types ◽  
National Consensus ◽  
Over Time

Wholly apart from the questions of whether and under what circumstances major coercion is permissible under international law and whether minor coercion, including threats, is lawful, there is a broad and deep national consensus that the United States should continuously develop a military capacity sufficient for a range of contingencies and maintain it in a state of readiness. The consensus has been far less certain with regard to who will decide, and how, to initiate and use this capacity, at varying intensities. The original terms of the Constitution have been invoked by partisans of opposing views, but debate in those terms has proved inconclusive. Behind the legal bickering, a complex, but unstated, operational code has developed, allocating competence to initiate, direct and terminate different types of coercion among the branches. Parts of the operational code are clear and relatively stable over time. Other parts are less certain and can be projected only with qualifications, reservations or contingencies.

Death Penalty

2019 ◽  
pp. 193-202
Author(s):  
Tara Straka ◽  
Heather Ellis Cucolo ◽  
Merrill Rotter ◽  
Jeremy Colley
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Retardation ◽  
Intellectual Disability ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The United States ◽  
Forensic Professionals ◽  
Over Time

Chapter 26 describes the cases that have defined the evolution of the United States’ relationship with the death penalty. Over time, the country has gradually narrowed the pool of those eligible to be executed, prohibiting the infliction of death on individuals the mental retardation, mental illness, and most, recently, adolescents. These cases are important for forensic professionals who may be involved in the evaluation or treatment of capital defendants. The cases in this chapter are Estelle v. Smith, Ake v. Oklahoma, Ford v. Wainwright, Payne v. Tennessee, State v. Perry, Atkins v. Virginia, Roper v. Simmons and Panetti v. Quarterman. The new cases further refine issues related to intellectual disability standards and procedural protections. These include Ryan v. Gonzales, Hall v. Florida, Moore v. Texas and Mcwilliams v. Dunn.

Death Penalty

2014 ◽  
pp. 157-162
Author(s):  
Tara Straka
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Retardation ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
The United States ◽  
Forensic Professionals ◽  
Individuals With Mental Retardation ◽  
Over Time

Chapter 27 describes the cases that have defined the evolution of the United States’ relationship with the death penalty. Over time, the country has gradually narrowed the pool of those eligible to be executed, prohibiting the infliction of death on individuals with mental retardation or mental illness and, most recently, on adolescents. These cases are important for forensic professionals who may be involved in the evaluation or treatment of capital defendants. The cases in this chapter are Estelle v. Smith, Ake v. Oklahoma, Ford v. Wainwright, Payne v. Tennessee, State v. Perry, Atkins v. Virginia, Roper v. Simmons, and Panetti v. Quarterman.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document