The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the ensuing 'war on terror' have focused attention on issues that have previously lurked in a dark corner at the edge of the legal universe. This book presents a systematic and comprehensive attempt by legal scholars to conceptualize the theory of emergency powers, combining post-September 11 developments with more general theoretical, historical and comparative perspectives. The authors examine the interface between law and violent crises through history and across jurisdictions, bringing together insights gleaned from the Roman republic and Jewish law through to the initial responses to the July 2005 attacks in London. Three models of emergency powers are used to offer a conceptualization of emergency regimes, giving a coherent insight into law's interface with and regulation of crisis and a distinctive means to evaluate the legal options open to states for dealing with crises.

The Military Commissions scheme established by President George W. Bush in November 2001 has garnered considerable national and international controversy. In parallel with the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the creation of military courts has focused significant global attention on the use of such courts as a mechanism to process and try persons suspected of committing terrorist acts or offenses during armed conflict. This book brings together the viewpoints of leading scholars and policy makers on the topic of exceptional courts and military commissions with a series of unique contributions setting out the current state of the field. The book assesses the relationship between such courts and other intersecting and overlapping legal arenas including constitutional law, international law, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law. By examining the comparative patterns, similarities, and disjunctions arising from the use of such courts, this book also analyzes the political and legal challenges that the creation and operation of exceptional courts produces both within democratic states and for the international community.

The Military Commissions scheme established by President George W. Bush in November 2001 has garnered considerable national and international controversy. In parallel with the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the creation of military courts has focused significant global attention on the use of such courts as a mechanism to process and try persons suspected of committing terrorist acts or offenses during armed conflict. This book brings together the viewpoints of leading scholars and policy makers on the topic of exceptional courts and military commissions with a series of unique contributions setting out the current state of the field. The book assesses the relationship between such courts and other intersecting and overlapping legal arenas including constitutional law, international law, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law. By examining the comparative patterns, similarities, and disjunctions arising from the use of such courts, this book also analyzes the political and legal challenges that the creation and operation of exceptional courts produces both within democratic states and for the international community.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the ensuing 'war on terror' have focused attention on issues that have previously lurked in a dark corner at the edge of the legal universe. This book presents the first systematic and comprehensive attempt by legal scholars to conceptualize the theory of emergency powers, combining post-September 11 developments with more general theoretical, historical and comparative perspectives. The authors examine the interface between law and violent crises through history and across jurisdictions, bringing together insights gleaned from the Roman republic and Jewish law through to the initial responses to the July 2005 attacks in London. Three unique models of emergency powers are used to offer a novel conceptualization of emergency regimes, giving a coherent insight into law's interface with and regulation of crisis and a distinctive means to evaluate the legal options open to states for dealing with crises.