Detention Status Review Process in Transnational Armed Conflict: \u3cem\u3eAl Maquleh v. Gates,\u3c/em\u3e and the Parwan Detention Facility

This article will first set out a brief history and description of the airfield at Bagram and the detention facilities there. Second, it will explore the standards under international law and the implement ation of national regulations by which the detention status of individuals detained by U.S. military forces is determined, when such individuals may be released from detention, and the significance of the evolving concept of transnational armed conflict to these determinations. Third, it will review the U.S. Supreme Court‘s decision in Boumediene, explore the Court‘s analysis in reaching its decision, and identify what the Court found to be the most important factors in terms of applying its analysis to these types of detainee cases. The fourth part of the article will do the same for the D.C. District Court‘s decision in al Maqaleh, and will specifically note where the decision appears to misapply the Boumediene analysis and to find facts not in keeping with the actual situation of the Parwan Detention Facility. Fifth, this article will review the D.C. Circuit Court‘s formulation of the Boumediene analysis in the same fashion. Sixth, this article will describe the new status determination procedures in detail and explain why they are sufficient to obviate the need for the extension of the Suspension Clause to the Parwan Detention Facility. Finally, were the Suspension Clause deemed applicable to the Parwan Detention Facility, this article will explain why these procedures would be an adequate substitute for habeas corpus proceedings, and why they could serve as an adequate model for current and future U.S. military detention operations outside the U.S. in cases of transnational armed conflict between the U.S. and non-state actors

Tackling Gender in Kinetic Operations

From the perspective of operational risk, that is, risk to mission accomplishment, gender is not always relevant. This is likely true in equipment-heavy, force-on-force engagements that occur outside the presence of civilians, whose perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors might otherwise be crucial to mission success in civilian-centric operations. In civilian-centric operations such as counterinsurgency or stability operations, the failure to consider gender likely does pose a risk to mission accomplishment. DoD\u27s implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 has resulted in important progress in bringing greater attention to gender considerations in operations, but it has a gap in coverage. Consistent with the law, DoD\u27s implementation of it does not meaningfully consider the operational relevance of gender in the kinetic parts of operations. However, the new DoD program on Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response provides an opportunity to factor gender into the kinetic parts in an operationally relevant way.https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/wps/1018/thumbnail.jp

Litigating Genocide: A Consideration of the Criminal Court in Light of the German Jew\u27s Legal Response to Nazi Persecution, 1933-1941

After years of negotiation, a majority of the nations of the world have agreed to create an International Criminal Court. It will be given jurisdiction over three core types of offenses: genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. With regard to war crimes, however, nations that join the court may take advantage of an “opt-out” procedure, whereby the court\u27s jurisdiction over these offenses may be rejected for seven years after the court comes into existence. For various reasons, a small number of nations, including the United States, have refused to sign the treaty creating the court. While heralded as a breakthrough in the protection of individuals and minority groups from crimes against humanity, it remains to be seen how effective the court will be against the worst of such crimes, genocide. Although the International Criminal Court is still in its infancy and untested, this Article seeks to shed light on this question through a case study of the German Jews\u27 legal response to Nazi persecution between 1933 and 1941

Factoring Gender into Kinetic Operations

US military practice neither considers the gendered effects of kinetic actions in planning and executing operations nor tracks and measures them. The Department of Defense’s implementation of the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 instead focuses on the role of women in preventing armed conflict and resolving it. The implementation of the Department of Defense’s new Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan provides an opportunity to close this gap in an operationally relevant way

Ordinary Soldiers: A Study in Ethics, Law and Leadership

Ordinary Soldiers uses a World War II case study as the basis for educating, training, and inspiring current and future officers through critical consideration of leadership and ethics. The resource prompts discussion of the legal and ethical standards U.S. military professionals are expected to meet, the challenges military leaders face in making consistently legal decisions in a combat theater, and the consequences of failure to meet these standards. Ordinary Soldiers has been designed in a modular format that can be adapted depending upon time available, lesson objectives, and class sizes ranging from just a few students to nearly 100. It is used at military academies, by the Reserve Officer Training Corps, and in other professional military education venues

Linking Revisions to the AP I Commentary to Gendered Effects of Kinetic Operations

In 2000, UNSCR 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security called on the international community to fully implement international humanitarian law ( THL ) that protects the rights of women and girls during armed conflict. Since then, work in this area has largely avoided the parts of IHL that deal with the application of armed force. The International Committee of the Red Cross ( ICRC ) is now well along in the process of updating its influential commentaries on the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocols. To fully implement UNSCR 1325 vis-a-vis IHL, the ICRC should use this opportunity to revise the Commentary to Additional Protocol I to include the use of gender considerations in its discussion of the principle of proportionality