Declaration of war Part 2

“Freiburg Lawyers’ Declaration”of 10 February 2003 On German Participation In A War Against Iraq
Kai Ambos
German Law Journal
Volume 4, Number 3, March 2003 p.253-262

The Bush Military Tribunals: Where have we been? Where are we going?
Eric M. Freedman
Criminal Justice
Volume 17, Number 2, Summer 2002 p.14

A discussion of the constitutional underpinning of a Declaration of war and examination of why the presidential order for military tribunals may be unwarranted.

The Declaration of War in the Dutch Constitution and Models of Legal Communication
Hanneke van Schooten
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law
Volume 14, Number 4, December 2001 p.329-344

WAR POWERS AND THE MILLENNIUM
Paul W. Kahn
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Volume 34, Number 1, November 2000 p.11

In this Article, Professor Paul W. Kahn argues that scholars examining Congress’s power to declare war have generally failed to confront the most important contemporary issue: reconciling American constitutional law with the emerging international legal order of human rights. Congress’s war-declaring power traditionally functioned as a point of intersection between the regime of international law and that of domestic law. Both of these regimes, however, changed dramatically in the latter part of the twentieth century. With the United Nations Charter, the category of war disappeared from international law. Internationally, a declaration of war is now a meaningless act. Domestically, the structural incapacities of Congress to act in the area of foreign affairs have substantially increased in the last fifty years. The hope that the war-declaring function of Congress can serve a legitimating function with respect to the use of force is untenable in light of this incapacity. In any case, claims that presidential uses of force are not adequately responsive to the public will mistake contemporary problems for those of the last generation. Efforts to reinvigorate Congress’s war-declaring power are unlikely to serve any significant democratic purpose, but are likely to disable the emerging international regime of human rights enforcement.

THE WAR POWERS RESOLUTION AND KOSOVO
Abraham D. Sofaer
Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Volume 34, Number 1, November 2000 p.71

In his speech, Judge Abraham Sofaer examines the question whether the war in Kosovo was appropriately authorized by Congress in the manner provided by the War Powers Resolution. The War Powers Resolution provides that congressional approval is established for a military action when Congress explicitly declares its authorization in a law pursuant to the Resolution’s requirements. Judge Sofaer argues that while Congress made no such official declaration of war during Kosovo, the measures that Congress adopted following the deployment of U.S. troops into Yugoslavia implied authorization and established its approval. As such, the Resolution’s provision with respect to the form of congressional authorization of military action should be repealed because it gives Congress a way of saying that it did not approve a war that it not only tolerated, but also condoned and financially supported.

Author: international

Mentioned in these Entries

Declaration of war.