The practices of Al-Qaeda and its most famous mentor, Osama bin Laden, were undoubtedly acts of terrorism, monstrous to any civilized human being.
But what moral standing does a country have to act in the name of a "greater good" while breaking all civilized international agreements and acting in absolute illegality?
The USA broke all international conventions, exercising police and judicial powers, executing a wanted person on foreign soil.
Even if a defendant confesses, modern Constitutions, including the American one, guarantee the right to a fair trial, with the defense being the exception judge, guaranteeing broad defense and the right to be heard.
It's even an exaggeration to think about Human Rights,
We well know that Osama bin Laden could not have acted alone. Not him, nor ten others. We are talking about hundreds or thousands of men and women who chose terrorism's madness as a way to rebel against American exploitation and grotesque interference in the developing world.
And now?
We must prepare ourselves to relive the climate of fear we experienced on September 11, 2001. Intellectuals around the world are stunned by these new developments. And experience shows that such acts are not easily forgotten.
Opinions
"It was clearly a violation of international law," said former West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt.
Ehrhart Koerting, Interior Minister of the city-state of Berlin, said: "As a lawyer, I would have preferred to see (Bin Laden) brought to trial at the International Criminal Court."
"The Americans claim to be at war against terrorism and that they can eliminate their adversaries on the battlefield," said Knoops. "But, in a strictly formal sense, this argument does not hold up." Dutch jurist Gert-Jan Knoops, specializing in international law.
"We want to know what the orders were, what the rules of engagement were. We want to know exactly what happened (...) and what the US claims Bin Laden was actually involved in." "Is the world a better place because Bin Laden is no longer around? One can obviously answer that question. But does that mean you have the right to violate human rights protocols or international law to do so? Then, no." Reed Brody, consultant for the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
The practices of Al-Qaeda and its most famous mentor, Osama bin Laden, were undoubtedly acts of terrorism, monstrous to any civilized human being.
But what moral standing does a country have to act in the name of a "greater good" while breaking all civilized international agreements and acting in absolute illegality?
The USA broke all international conventions, exercising police and judicial powers, executing a wanted person on foreign soil.
Even if a defendant confesses, modern Constitutions, including the American one, guarantee the right to a fair trial, with the defense being the exception judge, guaranteeing broad defense and the right to be heard.
It's even an exaggeration to think about Human Rights,
We well know that Osama bin Laden could not have acted alone. Not him, nor ten others. We are talking about hundreds or thousands of men and women who chose terrorism's madness as a way to rebel against American exploitation and grotesque interference in the developing world.
And now?
We must prepare ourselves to relive the climate of fear we experienced on September 11, 2001. Intellectuals around the world are stunned by these new developments. And experience shows that such acts are not easily forgotten.
Opinions
"It was clearly a violation of international law," said former West German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt.
Ehrhart Koerting, Interior Minister of the city-state of Berlin, said: "As a lawyer, I would have preferred to see (Bin Laden) brought to trial at the International Criminal Court."
"The Americans claim to be at war against terrorism and that they can eliminate their adversaries on the battlefield," said Knoops. "But, in a strictly formal sense, this argument does not hold up." Dutch jurist Gert-Jan Knoops, specializing in international law.
"We want to know what the orders were, what the rules of engagement were. We want to know exactly what happened (...) and what the US claims Bin Laden was actually involved in." "Is the world a better place because Bin Laden is no longer around? One can obviously answer that question. But does that mean you have the right to violate human rights protocols or international law to do so? Then, no." Reed Brody, consultant for the New York-based Human Rights Watch.
