Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T00:56:18.268Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - International responsibility, terrorism and counter-terrorism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 April 2015

Helen Duffy
Helen Duffy
Affiliation:
Universiteit Leiden
Get access

Summary

The question of responsibility for acts of international terrorism, or responses to international terrorism, has permeated discussion since 9/11. Was a state responsible for the 9/11 attacks, or for acts of international terrorism since then, and according to what legal standard? To what extent do the permissible responses, including the resort to armed force, depend on responsibility? Questions regarding state responsibility for terrorism have arisen to similar effect in many other contexts, before and after 9/11, such as in relation to the killing of former Lebanese Prime Minister Harari, the Lockerbie bombing or, more recently, in the context of allegations of Iranian involvement in attempts on US territory and beyond.

In addition to questions of state responsibility for terrorism itself are others concerning counter-terrorism: in the context of multi-faceted inter-state cooperation post-9/11, in what circumstances are states responsible in connection with wrongs by other states, or by private security companies carrying out security or counter-terrorism measures at the behest of the state? While the focus of this chapter is on state responsibility, fundamental questions also arise regarding those individuals and entities accused of being engaged in terrorism: to what extent can al Qaeda, or associated entities or individuals, be considered responsible under international law?

Type
Chapter
Information
The ‘War on Terror' and the Framework of International Law , pp. 75 - 116
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Trapp, K. N., ‘Holding States Responsible for Terrorism before the International Court of Justice’, 3(2) (2012) Journal of International Dispute Settlement279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See Report of the ILC on the work of its 53rd session, UN Doc. A/56/10 (2001) Chapter IV, pp. 59–365
Crawford, J., The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text and Commentaries (Cambridge, 2002)Google Scholar
Combacau, J. and Alland, D., ‘“Primary” and “Secondary” Rules in the Law of State Responsibility: Categorizing International Obligations’, 16 (1985) NYIL81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, J., Pellet, A. and Olleson, S. (eds.), The Law of International Responsibility: Oxford Commentaries on International Law (Oxford, 2010)CrossRef
Nollkaemper, A., ‘Concurrence between Individual Responsibility and State Responsibility in International Law’, 52 (2003) International and Comparative Law Quarterly615–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, T., Terrorism and the State: Rethinking the Rules of State Responsibility (Portland, OR, 2006), pp. 156Google Scholar
Jennings, R. Y. and Watts, A. (eds.), Oppenheim’s International Law (Oxford, 2008), 9th edn, pp. 502–3
Corfu Channel (United Kingdom v. Albania) (Merits), ICJ Rep. 1949, p. 4
Advisory Council on International Affairs, Failing States: A Global Responsibility, Advisory Report No. 35, May 2004, p. 59
Dutch AIV Report 2004
Schiedeman, S., ‘Standards of Proof in Forcible Responses to Terrorism’, 50 (2000) Syracuse Law Review249Google Scholar
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) (Merits), ICJ Rep. 1986, p. 14
Travalio, G. M., ‘Terrorism, International Law and the Use of Military Force’, 18 (2000) Wisconsin International Law Journal145 at 265Google Scholar
Stahn, C., ‘Nicaragua is Dead, Long Live Nicaragua’, in Walter, C., Vöneky, S., Röben, V. and Schorkopf, F. (eds.), Terrorism as a Challenge for National and International Law: Security versus Liberty (Berlin, 2004), pp. 827–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ICJ Genocide case: Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia & Herzegovina v. Serbia & Montenegro) (hereinafter, ‘ICJ Genocide case’), Judgment, 26 February 2007, ICJ Rep. 2007, p. 91
See Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case No. IT-94–1-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 15 July 1999
United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Teheran (United States v. Iran), ICJ Rep. 1980, p. 3
Dinstein, Y., ‘Comments on the Presentation by Nico Krisch and Carsten Stahn’, in Becker, T., Terrorism and the State: Rethinking the Rules of State Responsibility (Portland, OR, 2006), p. 225Google Scholar
Cassese, A., ‘The International Community’s “Legal” Response to Terrorism’, 38 (1989) ICLQ589 at 599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cotler, I., ‘Does the Anti-Terror Bill Go Too Far? No: We Need Powerful New Legal Tools to Fight the New Global Terror Threat’, Globe and Mail, 20 November 2001Google Scholar
Lehto, M., Indirect Responsibility for Terrorism Acts: Redefinition of the Concept of Terrorism Beyond Violent Acts (Leiden, 2010), pp. 393Google Scholar
Jinks, D., ‘State Responsibility for Acts of Private Armed Groups’, 4 (2003) Chicago Journal of International Law83, 85Google Scholar
Sassòli, M., ‘State Responsibility for Violations of International Humanitarian Law’, 84 (2002) JRRC401Google Scholar
Dinstein, Y., War, Aggression and Self-Defence (Cambridge, 2011), p. 261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
‘Qaeda Had Targeted Congress and CIA, Panel Finds’, International Herald Tribune, June 17, 2004
Greenwood, C., ‘International Law and the “War against Terrorism”’, 78 (2002) International Affairs301 at 311–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erickson, R. J., Legitimate Use of Military Force Against State-Sponsored International Terrorism (Montgomery, AL, 1989)Google Scholar
Gray, C., Judicial Remedies in International Law (Oxford, 1987)Google Scholar
Cortright, D. and Lopez, G. A., The Sanctions Decade: Assessing UN Strategies in the 1990s (Boulder, CO, 2000)Google Scholar
Craven, M., ‘Humanitarianism and the Quest for Smarter Sanctions’, 13 (2002) EJIL43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Connell, M. E., ‘Debating the Law of Sanctions’, 13 (2002) EJIL63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennoune, K., ‘“Sovereignty vs. Suffering?” Re-Examining Sovereignty and Human Rights through the Lens of Iraq’, 13 (2002) EJIL243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, J., ‘International Law and the War on Terrorism: The Road Ahead’, 32 (2002) Israel Yearbook on Human Rights117Google Scholar
Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276, Advisory Opinion, ICL Rep., 21 June 1971
Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, ICJ Rep. 136, 9 July 2004
Barcelona Traction case (Belgium v. Spain) (Second Phase) 1970 ICJ Rep. 3 at para. 33
Marks, S., ‘State Centrism, International Law and the Anxieties of Influence’, 19 (2006) Leiden Journal of International Law339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van den Herik, L. and Schrijver, N. (eds.), Counter-Terrorism Strategies in a Fragmented International Legal Order: Meeting the Challenges (Cambridge, 2013), Ch. 1CrossRef
Trials of German Major War Criminals: Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal sitting at Nuremberg, Germany, Part 22 (London, 1950), p. 447
Ambos, K., ‘Article 25. Individual Criminal Responsibility’, in Triffterer, O. (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Baden-Baden, 1999), pp. 475 ff. at p. 478Google Scholar
‘Relevance of International Humanitarian Law to Non-State Actors’, 27 (2003) Bruges Collegium, available at: , last visited 5 May 2013
Henckaerts, J. M., ‘Binding Armed Opposition Groups through Humanitarian Treaty Law and Customary Law’, 27 (2003) Bruges Collegium123, available at: Google Scholar
Velásquez Rodriguez v. Honduras (Merits), Judgment, 29 July 1988
Henkin, L., ‘The Universal Declaration at 50 and the Challenge of Global Markets’, 25 (1999) Brooklyn Journal of International Law25 at 25Google Scholar
Sadiq Shek Elmi v. Australia, CAT, Comm. No. 120/1998, Views of 25 May 1999
Clapham, A., Human Rights Obligations of Non-State Actors (New York, 2006), pp. 195–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dennis, M. J., ‘Current Developments: The Fifty-Seventh Session of the UN Commission on Human Rights’, 96 (2002) AJIL181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodley, N. S., ‘Detention as a Response to Terrorism’, in de Frías, A. M. Salinas, White, N. and Samuel, K. (eds.), Counter-Terrorism: International Law and Practice (Oxford, 2012)Google Scholar
Fitzpatrick, J., ‘Speaking Law to Power: The War Against Terrorism and Human Rights’, 14 (2003) EJIL241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schabas, W. A., ‘Punishment of Non-State Actors in Non-International Armed Conflict’, 26 (2003) Fordham International Law Journal907 at 932–3Google Scholar
Priest, D. and Arkin, W., ‘National Security Inc.’, in ‘Top Secret America: A Washington Post Investigation’, The Washington Post, July 20, 2010, available at: Google Scholar
Jones, O., ‘Implausible Deniability: State Responsibility for the Acts of Private Military Firms’, 24 (2009) Connecticut Journal of International Law239Google Scholar
Borger, J., ‘US Military in Torture Scandal: Use of Private Contractors in Iraqi Jail Interrogations Highlighted by Inquiry into Abuse of Prisoners’, Guardian, 30 April 2004, available at: Google Scholar
Denselow, J., ‘The US Departure from Iraq is an Illusion’, Guardian, 25 October 2011 at: Google Scholar
Williams, T., ‘Iraqis Angered as Blackwater Charges Dropped’, The New York Times, January 1, 2010 at: Google Scholar
de Londras, F., ‘Privatized Sovereign Performance: Regulating in the “Gap” between Security and Human Rights?’, 38 (2011) Journal of Law and Society96 at 97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoppe, C., ‘Passing the Buck: State Responsibility for Private Military Companies’, 19 (2008) EJIL989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, J., Commentaries (2002)
Miller, G., ‘Iraq–Terrorism Link Continues to Be Problematic’, Los Angeles Times, September 9, 2003Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×