Apocalyptic visions and the law: the legacy of September 11

Abstract

Introduction: For most of the world, the horrific events of September 11 could bring forth only one judgment in human, moral or social terms. Even for those of us far removed from the United States who saw the events on television - live and replayed time and time again – the truth was simple: the perpetrators and planners of these atrocities had committed a profound wrong, an act of evil and malevolence that surpassed in quality and impact any other terrorist attack in recent memory. While those who had hijacked the four planes and sent thousands of innocent victims to their deaths could not longer be brought to justice before any terrestrial court, there understandably arose out of the anger and grief a grim determination that those who had instigated and supported the commission of these acts would pay the price. Yet this unanimity of moral outrage and condemnation in the immediate aftermath of September 11 has given way to controversy and uncertainty in relation to many aspects of the legal and political responses to those events. The ordinary citizen might be forgiven for thinking that our international and national law and legal institutions should have no difficulty in bringing to justice those responsible for these outrages against human life and dignity – and that this would be done expeditiously in a manner consistent not only with the goals of justice but also in accordance with the protections of the rule of law, including essential principles of fairness and fundamental rights. Why does the international and national legal response seem so much in disarray and so contested and confused? In this lecture tonight I wish to address a number of aspects of the aftermath of September 11, in particular the adequacy of the international legal system to respond to the challenges those events have posed and the difficulties that have arisen in our efforts to address the consequences of those events at the international and national levels. My remarks will be structured around three issues: War and crime, or war or crime: what is the appropriate model of law that should be applied to events such as September 11 and to terrorism more generally? International efforts to address terrorism, including the problem of definition: in this section I will discuss the challenges that face us in formulating a workable international definition of terrorism, an endeavour that is fundamental to a global campaign against it. Terrorism and human rights: Finally, I will touch on some aspects of the relationship between terrorism and human rights at the international and national levels, and argue that we should not be seduced by the sirenic call of security that lures us in the current calls to root out terrorism in all its forms.