State Responsibility for International Terrorism (Oxford Monographs in International Law)

The international legal regime governing the relationship between acts of terrorism and States is both complicated and, in almost every case, concerned with covert activity, so that its exact nature and content is very difficult to establish in any given case. While it is rare for States openly to engage in acts of terrorism this does not mean that they should not be held responsible for terrorist acts. Most analyses focus on the question of the attributability of terrorist acts to States, and on the implications thereof for the legality of uses of force in self-defence against States harbouring terrorists. Dr Trapp, in a refreshing approach, takes the question futher. Her study focuses on the substantive obligations to prevent and punish acts of international terrorism and the implementation of State responsibility, both judicially and otherwise, in response to the breach of those obligations. It is an important and timely contribution to a debate that brings together two topics which are the subject of intense contemporary academic and public interest— terrorism and State responsibility. "The rules of state responsibility have an important but under-utilized role to play in the terrorism context. They determine both whether a breach of primary obligations has occurred, through the rules of attribution, and the consequences which flow from that breach, including the possible adoption of responsive measures by injured states. This book explores the substantive international legal obligations and rules of state responsibility applicable to international terrorism and examines the problems and prospects for effectively holding states responsible for internationally wrongful acts related to terrorism. In particular, it analyses the way in which the implementation of state responsibility for international terrorism may be affected by the self-determination debate and any applicable lex specialis (including the jus in bello), including any sub-systems of international law (such as the WTO), as well as by the interaction between determinations of individual criminal responsibility and the implementation of state responsibility. The international community has responded to the threat of international terrorism through both a security/jus ad bellum paradigm and by creating an international criminal law framework to address the conduct of non-state terrorist actors. The secondary rules of state responsibility analyzed in this book cut across both approaches as they apply regardless of states breaching their primary obligations relating to terrorism through participation in or a failure to prevent or punish terrorism. While this book identifies a number of problems in implementing state responsibility for international terrorism, it also highlights the prospects for the rules of state responsibility to make a crucial contribution to maintaining respect for obligations which lie at the very foundations of the contemporary international legal order, and to restoring the relationships between states if those obligations are breached"--Provided by publisher The rules of state responsibility have an important but under-utilized role to play in the terrorism context. They determine both whether a breach of primary obligations has occurred, through the rules of attribution, and the consequences which flow from that breach, including the possible adoption of responsive measures by injured states. This book explores the substantive international legal obligations and rules of state responsibility applicable to international terrorism and examines the problems and prospects for effectively holding states responsible for internationally wrongful acts related to terrorism. In particular, it analyses the way in which the implementation of state responsibility for international terrorism may be affected by the self-determination debate and any applicable lex specialis (including the jus in bello ), including any sub-systems of international law (such as the WTO), as well as by the interaction between determinations of individual criminal responsibility and the implementation of state responsibility. The international community has responded to the threat of international terrorism through both a security/ jus ad bellum paradigm and by creating an international criminal law framework to address the conduct of non-state terrorist actors. The secondary rules of state responsibility analyzed in this book cut across both approaches as they apply regardless of states breaching their primary obligations relating to terrorism through participation in or a failure to prevent or punish terrorism. While this book identifies a number of problems in implementing state responsibility for international terrorism, it also highlights the prospects for the rules of state responsibility to make a crucial contribution to maintaining respect for obligations which lie at the very foundations of the contemporary international legal order, and to restoring the relationships between states if those obligations are breached. The rules of State responsibility have an important but under-utilised role to play in the terrorism context. They determine both whether a breach of primary obligations has occurred, through the rules of attribution, and the consequences which flow from that breach, including the possible adoption of responsive measures by injured States. This book explores the substantive international legal obligations and rules of State responsibility applicable to international terrorism and examines the problems and prospects for effectively holding States responsible for internationally wrongful acts related to terrorism. In particular, it analyses the way in which the implementation of State responsibility for international terrorism may be affected by the self-determination debate and any applicable lex specialis (including the jus in bello ) and sub-systems of international law (including the WTO), as well as the interaction between determinations of individual criminal responsibility and the implementation of State responsibility. The international community has responded to the threat of international terrorism through both a security/ jus ad bellum paradigm and by creating an international criminal law framework to address the conduct of non-State terrorist actors. The secondary rules of State responsibility analysed in this book cut across both approaches as they apply whether States breach their primary obligations relating to terrorism through participation in or a failure to prevent or punish terrorism. While this book identifies a number of problems in implementing State responsibility for international terrorism, it also highlights the prospects for the rules of State responsibility to make a crucial contribution to maintaining respect for obligations which lie at the very foundations of the contemporary international legal order, and to restoring the relationships between States if those obligations are breached The rules of state responsibility have an important but under-utilized role to play in the terrorism context. They determine both whether a breach of primary obligations has occurred, through the rules of attribution, and the consequences which flow from that breach, including the possible adoption of responsive measures by injured states. This book explores the substantive international legal obligations and rules of state responsibility applicable to international terrorism and examines the problems and prospects for effectively holding states responsible for internationally wrongful acts related to terrorism. In particular, it analyses the way in which the implementation of state responsibility for international terrorism may be affected by the self-determination debate, any applicable lex specialis (including the jus in bello), and sub-systems of international law (such as the WTO-), as well as the interaction between determinations of individual criminal responsibility and the implementation of state responsibility. The international community has responded to the threat of international terrorism both through a security/jus ad bellum paradigm and by creating an international criminal law framework to address the conduct of non-state terrorist actors. The secondary rules of state responsibility analysed in this book cut across both approaches as they apply, whether states breaching their primary obligations relating to terrorism through participation in or a failure to prevent or punish terrorism. While this book identifies a number of problems in implementing state responsibility for international terrorism, it also highlights the prospects for the rules of state responsibility to make a crucial contribution to maintaining respect for obligations which lie at the very foundations of the contemporary international legal order, and to restoring the relationships between states if those obligations are breached. International Law Imposes Many Obligations Related To Terrorism On States, Including The Duty To Prevent Terrorist Acts, To Extradite Terrorists Or Prosecute Them, And Not To Participate In Terrorist Activities. This Book Examines How The Rules Of State Responsibility Can Be Used To Enforce These Obligations And To Respond To Violations. Kimberley N. Trapp. Includes Bibliographical References (p. [269]-289) And Index. International law imposes a range of obligations related to terrorism on states, including the duty to prevent terrorist acts, to extradite terrorists or prosecute them, and not to participate in terrorist activities. This book examines how the rules of state responsibility can be used to enforce these obligations and to respond to violations. Readership: Academics and students studying the law of state responsibility and the legal regime applicable to international terrorism; Government, UN and international/regional organization legal advisers.