*/
As lawyers around the world watch with apprehension to see how President-Elect Trump will handle policy engaging the rule of law and human rights, Katherine Duncan reports on the IBA Human Rights Institute’s open letter to the incoming commander-in-chief
In September, just a short distance away from The White House and as we watched the events of the US Presidential Campaign unfold, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) held an open forum at the IBA Conference in Washington, DC.
It discussed the draft of a letter which would make its way to the Oval Office to sit on the desk of either President Clinton or President Trump.
The forum was constituted of lawyers predominantly from outside the US, conscious that the most powerful country in the world did not always bow to the rule of law. The international legal community, through the letter, sought to remind the President-Elect that when terror strikes, the President must still uphold the rule of law or terror ultimately wins. Participants at the session were provided with a template letter and invited to make suggestions on what to include, which would then be completed by the staff at the IBAHRI, and presented as an open letter to the new incumbent.
Expert panel
A panel of experts opened the session. Baroness Kennedy chaired the panel which comprised Hans Corell, former Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and the Legal Counsel for the United Nations; Cori Crider, Reprieve; Ryan Goodman, New York University School of Law; and D’Arcy Kemnitz, National LGBT Bar Association. The forum discussed and debated both international and domestic scenarios which engage the rule of law, with which the next American President would have to grapple.
Corell opened the discussion by reminding the forum on the importance of the law in the wellbeing of a nation and the world. The IBAHRI does not write a letter to every incoming head of state, but because the US is considered to be one of the leading lights of democracy, and the concept of rights and civil liberties is so fundamentally embedded in their constitution, it is often looked to by other countries to see how their legal system should run.
Goodman spoke of US support for foreign partners in counter-terrorism, eg for Syrian rebels fighting Islamic State. The next President would need to consider how, and to what extent, it can support foreign partners in its international agenda, if those partners violate international law and international human rights law. A pre-existing framework for the relationship would need to be clear and transparent.
The President-Elect will also need to consider what legitimate targets are under international law. Goodman suggested, for example, that parts of the so-called Islamic State (IS) act more like a state than they do a terrorist group, therefore there may be people who work in governance within that organisation which would not be legitimate targets. Or, is everyone who works for IS a legitimate target? Thought will also need to be given to what objects are targetable. IS’s hold on oil and gas provides revenue; so is it lawful to target facilities and what are the limits on that?
Question of timing
There was much debate on whether the IBAHRI should send the letter to the candidates, rather than waiting until after the election. Some felt, given Donald Trump’s obvious scourging of human rights, it would be more appropriate to draft the letter immediately and release it to the media. The IBAHRI had intended to send it to the newly elected President, so as to prevent any claim of interference in another sovereign state’s electoral process. With the power the US President holds globally, and the extent to which the Presidential campaign is televised around the world, it can sometimes feel as though this is not just a domestic election but an international election. Nevertheless, it was concluded that the international legal community could not, and should not, be seeking to interfere in a country’s democratic process.
Although a number of issues were suggested, all of which were of great importance, such as climate change, nuclear disarmament and corruption, it was determined that a concise letter would hopefully have the greatest impact, rather than a long list (see summary, below).
The final draft has yet to be finalised. While some felt that the exercise was completely pointless with Donald Trump as commander-in-chief, the consensus was that the international legal community should use its voice to keep these issues on the agenda and to inform the next President that lawyers around the world will be watching to see how the new administration handles policy which affects human rights, and will be seeking to promote the rule of law and the furtherance of those rights.
Contributor Katherine Duncan, 5 St Andrews Hill
Further information
A link to a video of the session can be found here.
A letter to (Donald Trump’s) America
Use of torture in the war against terror and treatment of prisoners
Ratification of international human rights treaties
Decriminalisation of homosexuality across the globe
Respect for the rule of law and international influence
Katherine Duncan is Chair of the Young Barristers Committee (2020). She specialises in family law at Garden Court Chambers.
It discussed the draft of a letter which would make its way to the Oval Office to sit on the desk of either President Clinton or President Trump.
The forum was constituted of lawyers predominantly from outside the US, conscious that the most powerful country in the world did not always bow to the rule of law. The international legal community, through the letter, sought to remind the President-Elect that when terror strikes, the President must still uphold the rule of law or terror ultimately wins. Participants at the session were provided with a template letter and invited to make suggestions on what to include, which would then be completed by the staff at the IBAHRI, and presented as an open letter to the new incumbent.
Expert panel
A panel of experts opened the session. Baroness Kennedy chaired the panel which comprised Hans Corell, former Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and the Legal Counsel for the United Nations; Cori Crider, Reprieve; Ryan Goodman, New York University School of Law; and D’Arcy Kemnitz, National LGBT Bar Association. The forum discussed and debated both international and domestic scenarios which engage the rule of law, with which the next American President would have to grapple.
Corell opened the discussion by reminding the forum on the importance of the law in the wellbeing of a nation and the world. The IBAHRI does not write a letter to every incoming head of state, but because the US is considered to be one of the leading lights of democracy, and the concept of rights and civil liberties is so fundamentally embedded in their constitution, it is often looked to by other countries to see how their legal system should run.
Goodman spoke of US support for foreign partners in counter-terrorism, eg for Syrian rebels fighting Islamic State. The next President would need to consider how, and to what extent, it can support foreign partners in its international agenda, if those partners violate international law and international human rights law. A pre-existing framework for the relationship would need to be clear and transparent.
The President-Elect will also need to consider what legitimate targets are under international law. Goodman suggested, for example, that parts of the so-called Islamic State (IS) act more like a state than they do a terrorist group, therefore there may be people who work in governance within that organisation which would not be legitimate targets. Or, is everyone who works for IS a legitimate target? Thought will also need to be given to what objects are targetable. IS’s hold on oil and gas provides revenue; so is it lawful to target facilities and what are the limits on that?
Question of timing
There was much debate on whether the IBAHRI should send the letter to the candidates, rather than waiting until after the election. Some felt, given Donald Trump’s obvious scourging of human rights, it would be more appropriate to draft the letter immediately and release it to the media. The IBAHRI had intended to send it to the newly elected President, so as to prevent any claim of interference in another sovereign state’s electoral process. With the power the US President holds globally, and the extent to which the Presidential campaign is televised around the world, it can sometimes feel as though this is not just a domestic election but an international election. Nevertheless, it was concluded that the international legal community could not, and should not, be seeking to interfere in a country’s democratic process.
Although a number of issues were suggested, all of which were of great importance, such as climate change, nuclear disarmament and corruption, it was determined that a concise letter would hopefully have the greatest impact, rather than a long list (see summary, below).
The final draft has yet to be finalised. While some felt that the exercise was completely pointless with Donald Trump as commander-in-chief, the consensus was that the international legal community should use its voice to keep these issues on the agenda and to inform the next President that lawyers around the world will be watching to see how the new administration handles policy which affects human rights, and will be seeking to promote the rule of law and the furtherance of those rights.
Contributor Katherine Duncan, 5 St Andrews Hill
Further information
A link to a video of the session can be found here.
A letter to (Donald Trump’s) America
Use of torture in the war against terror and treatment of prisoners
Ratification of international human rights treaties
Decriminalisation of homosexuality across the globe
Respect for the rule of law and international influence
As lawyers around the world watch with apprehension to see how President-Elect Trump will handle policy engaging the rule of law and human rights, Katherine Duncan reports on the IBA Human Rights Institute’s open letter to the incoming commander-in-chief
In September, just a short distance away from The White House and as we watched the events of the US Presidential Campaign unfold, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) held an open forum at the IBA Conference in Washington, DC.
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
