An evaluation of the U.S. policy of "targeted killing" under international law : the case of Anwar Al-Aulaqi (part II)
Jake William Rylatt
Host item entries:
California Western international law journal, Vol. 44, Spring 2014, p. 115-147
The analysis in Part II this two-part article develops the overall thesis proposed by this author, namely that the targeted killing of Anwar Al-Aulaqi must be evaluated under both jus ad bellum and the "law enforcement" paradigm of International Human Rights Law (IHRL). In doing so, this article analyzes the United States' invocation of a non-international armed conflict (NIAC) to encompass the Al-Aulaqi strike, consequently triggering the more permissive rules of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). After concluding that the strike may not be justified as falling within the scope of any armed conflict in which the United States was engaged at that time, this Article continues to consider whether the strike is justifiable under the true applicable law, IHRL. In doing so, a final conclusion as to the legality of the Al-Aulaqi strike will be reached; a conclusion that may have far-reaching implications for the legality of the U.S. policy of conducting "Targeted Killings" within States such as Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia.
By entering this website, you consent to the use of technologies, such as cookies and analytics, to customise content, advertising and provide social media features. This will be used to analyse traffic to the website, allowing us to understand visitor preferences and improving our services. Learn more