Constitutional problems of counterterrorism since 2001: A socio-legal analysis of detention at Guantánamo

Author/s Domenico Tosini
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/1
Language Italian Pages 23 P. 29-51 File size 219 KB
DOI 10.3280/SD2016-001002
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The article examines several of the most significant problems found in the field of counterterrorism since 2001, considering a case study of the measures adopted in the Guantánamo prison camp. Legal thinking and modern states’ legal orders are known to have tried to identify criteria and institutional models capable of ensuring compatibility between the use of extraordinary powers focused on tackling threats and calamities and their conformity with the principles and constitutional norms on which those same legal orders are founded. The counterterrorism set in motion by the 11 September attacks and other comparable events, such as the suicide attacks in London in 2005, focuses attention on the precarious nature of this compatibility. This has been principally evident in the manner in which use has been made of preventive detention: in particular in the case of detention in the camp in Cuba. Despite a series of Supreme Court rulings about detention in Guantánamo, whose purpose was to curb the spread of the powers wielded by the executive, an investigation of the rhetoric used by the Bush administration, of the nature of the measures taken and of the countermeasures adopted to evade the effect of the Supreme Court’s rulings has thrown light on an underlying logic: that of the pressure applied to the entire apparatus of the state for the purpose of subjecting the decisionmaking process about the state of emergency to the primacy of criteria of the efficiency/inefficiency of the measures for preventing threats and safeguarding security, at the expense of their constitutionality/unconstitutionality

Keywords: Antiterrorismo Guantánamo - Libertà civili - Stato d’emergenza - Terrorismo

  1. Abrams, Norman, 2006. Developments in US Anti-terrorism Law: Checks and Balances Undermined. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 4, 5: 1117-1136. DOI: 10.1093/jicj/mql080
  2. Agamben, Giorgio, 2003. Stato di eccezione. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
  3. Aoláin, Fionnuala Ní, & Oren Gross, 2013. Introduction: Guantánamo and Beyond. In Fionnuala Ní Aoláin & Oren Gross (a cura di), Guantánamo and Beyond. Exceptional Courts and Military Commissions in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-35.
  4. Amnesty International, 2005. Guantánamo. An Icon of Lawlessness, Amnesty International, 6 January, -- %A1namo-bay-icon-lawlessness-enters-fourth-year-torture-allegations-mount (visitato il 20 giugno 2011).
  5. Bellinger III, John, & Vijay M. Padmanabhan, 2011. Detention Operations in Contemporary Conflicts: Four Challenges for the Geneva Conventions and Other Existing Law. American Journal of International Law, 105, 2: 201-243. DOI: 10.5305/amerjintelaw.105.2.0201
  6. Birdsall, Aandrea, 2010. A Monstrous Failure of Justice? Guantánamo Bay and National Security Challenges to Fundamental Human Rights. International Politics, 47, 6: 680-697. DOI: 10.1057/ip.2010.25
  7. Blair, Tony, 2005. Full Text of Blair Statement on Extremism. The National Archive, 5 August.
  8. Bradley, Graham, & Josh White, 2006. Abizaid Credited With Popularizing the Term “Long War”‘. The Washington Post, 3 February, --https://www.washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/02/AR200 6020202242.html (visitato il 3 febbraio 2006). -- (visitato il 16 giugno 2011).
  9. https://www.washingtonpost. com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/02/AR200 6020202242.html (visitato il 3 febbraio 2006).
  10. (visitato il 16 giugno 2011).
  11. Chang, Nancy, 2002. Silencing Political Dissent. New York: Seven Stories Press.
  12. Cole, David, 2003a. Enemy Aliens. New York: The New Press.
  13. —, 2003b. Enemy Aliens. Stanford Law Review, 54: 953-1004.
  14. —, 2005. The Missing Patriot Debate. The Nation, 12 May,-- http://www.thenation .com/article/missing-patriot-debate (visitato il 15 gennaio 2011).
  15. —, 2006. Sanctioning Lawlessness. The Nation, 23 October, --http://www.thenation. com/article/sanctioning-lawlessness (visitato il 20 gennaio 2011).
  16. —, 2008. Closing the Law-free Zone. The Guardian, 14 June, --https://www.guard (visitato il 16 giugno 2011).
  17. —, 2013. Military Commissions and the Paradigm of Prevention. In: F. Aoláin & O. Gross (a cura di), Guantánamo and Beyond. Exceptional Courts and Military Commissions in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, pp. 95-116.
  18. De Londras, Fiona, 2008. Guantánamo Bay: Towards Legality? Modern Law Review, 71, 1: 36-58. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2230.2008.00680.x
  19. Deflem, Mathieu et al., 2005. Governmentality and the War on Terror: FBI Project Carnivore and the Diffusion of Disciplinary Power. Critical Criminology, 13, 1: 55-77.
  20. Dickson, Brice, 1992. Northern Ireland’s Emergency Legislation – The Wrong Medicine? Public Law, 10: 592-624.
  21. Durham, Martin, 2004. The American Right and the Framing of 9/11. The Political Quarterly, 75, 1: 17- 25. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-923X.2004.00567.x
  22. Dworkin, Ronald, 2002a. The Threat to Patriotism. The New York Review of Books, 49, 28 February, -- feb/28/the-threat-to-patriotism (visitato il 4 settembre 2005).
  23. —, 2002b. The Trouble with the Tribunals. The New York Review of Books, 49, 25 April, -- h-the-tribunals (visitato il 4 settembre 2005).
  24. Eboli, Valeria, 2010. La difesa dei diritti umani negli stati d’emergenza. Milano: Giuffrè.
  25. Eminent Jurists Panel on Terrorism, Counter-terrorism and Human Rights, 2009. Assessing Damage, Urging Action. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists, -- (visitato il 15 gennaio 2014).
  26. Fraenkel, Ernst, [1974]1983. Il doppio Stato. Contributo alla teoria della dittatura. Tr. it. di P. P. Portinaro. Intr. di N. Bobbio. Torino: Einaudi.
  27. Greenwold, Glen, & Ewen MacAskill, 2013. Boundless Informant: The NSA’s Secret Tool to Track Global Surveillance Data. The Guardian, 11 June, -- (visitato il 20 gennaio 2014).
  28. Gross, Oren, 2011. Constitutions and Emergency Regimes. In Tom Ginsburg & Rosalind Dixon (a cura di), Comparative Constitutional Law. Northampton (Mass.): Edward Elgard Publishing, pp. 334-355.
  29. —, & Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, 2006. Law in Times of Crisis: Emergency Powers in Theory and Practice. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press.
  30. Hoge, Warren, 2006. U.N. Report Calls for end to Guantánamo Detentions. The New York Times, 16 February, -- /16cnd-gitmo.html (visitato il 16 febbraio 2006).
  31. Hussain, Nasser, 2007. Beyond Norm and Exception: Guantánamo. Critical Inquiry, 33, 4: 734-753.
  32. Jackson, R., 2005. Writing the War on Terrorism: Language, Politics and Counter-Terrorism. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
  33. Johnson, Richard, 2002. Defending Ways of Life: The (Anti-)Terrorist Rhetoric of Bush and Blair. Theory, Culture and Society, 19, 4: 211-232. DOI: 10.1177/0263276402019004015
  34. Jones, Seth G., & Martin C. Libicki, 2008. How Terrorist Groups End: Lesson for Countering Al-Qaeda. Santa Monica (CA): RAND Corporation, --https://www.rand. org/pubs/monographs/MG741 (visitato il 10 ottobre 2010).
  35. Luhmann, Niklas, [1972]1977. Sociologia del diritto. Ed. it. a cura di A. Febbrajo. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  36. —, [1981]1990. La differenziazione del diritto. Ed. it. a cura di R. De Giorgi. Bologna: il Mulino.
  37. —, [1991]1996. Sociologia del rischio. Tr. it. di G. Corsi. Milano: Bruno Mondadori.
  38. —, [1993]2004. Law as a Social System. Tr. ingl. di K. A. Ziegert. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  39. Marazzita, Giuseppe, 2003. L’emergenza costituzionale. Milano: Giuffrè.
  40. Nesi, Giuseppe, 2005. International Cooperation in Counter-Terrorism. Aldershot (UK): Ashgate.
  41. Parker, Tom, 2005. Counterterrorism Policies in the United Kingdom. In Philip B. Heymann & Jiuliette N. Kayyem (a cura di), Protecting Liberty in an Age of Terror. Cambridge (Mass.) and London: The MIT Press, pp. 119-148.
  42. Riedel, Bruce 2008. The Search for Al-Qaeda. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.
  43. Risen, James, & Eric Lichtblau, 2005. Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers without Courts. The New York Times, 16 December, -- politics/16program.html (16 December 2005).
  44. politics/16program.html (16 December 2005).
  45. Sands, Philippe, 2005. Lawless World. London: Allen Lane-Penguin Books.
  46. Schmitt, Carl, [1968]1972. Le categorie del ‘politico’. Ed. it. a cura di G. Miglio e P. Schiera. Bologna: il Mulino.
  47. —, [1921]1975. La dittatura. Dalle origini dell’idea moderna di sovranità alla lotta di classe proletaria. Tr. it. di B. Liverani. Roma-Bari: Laterza.
  48. Steinhauser, Jennifer, & Jonathan Weisman, 2015. Key Parts of Patriot Act Expire Temporarily as Senate Moves Toward Limits on Spying. The New York Times, 31 May, -- (visitato il 1 giugno 2015).
  49. The New York Times, 2011. A Guide to the Memos on Torture. The New York Times, -- (visitato il 20 June 2011).
  50. Tosini, Domenico, 2005. The Welfare Courts: A Socio-legal Analysis of Risk Management through Modern Strict Liability. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 33, 4: 200-214. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsl.2005.07.003
  51. —, 2010. Al-Qaeda’s Strategic Gamble: The Sociology of Suicide Bombings in Iraq. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 35, 2: 271-308.
  52. —, 2012. Martiri che uccidono: il terrorismo suicida nelle nuove guerre. Bologna: il Mulino.
  53. UK Parliament, 2001. Antiterrorism, Crime and Security Act, 2001, Chapter 24, -- (visitato il 30 January 2014)
  54. —, 2006. The Terrorism Act, 2006, Chapter, -- /2006/11/pdfs/ukpga_20060011_en.pdf (visitato il 30 January 2014).
  55. US Congress, 2001. Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA Patriot Act). Public Law 107–56, 107th Congress, 26 October 2001, -- /pkg/PLAW-107publ56/pdf/PLAW-107publ56.pdf (visitato il 20 June 2011).
  56. —, 2006a. Detainee Treatment Act. Public Law 109-163, 109th Congress, 6 January, -- (visitato il 20 June 2011).
  57. —, 2006b. Military Commissions Act. Public Law 109–366, 109th Congress, 17 October, -- publ366.htm (visitato il 20 June 2011).
  58. —, 2006c. Military Commissions Act (Bill). 109th Congress, 2d Session, -- (visitato il 24 June 2011).
  59. US President, 2001a. Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People. Washington Post, 20 September, -- -srv/nation/specials/attacked/transcripts/bushaddress_092001.html (visitato il 25 June 2011).
  60. —, 2001b. President Issues Military Order: Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism. Washington DC: The White House, 13 November, -- (visitato il 17 June 2011).
  61. —, 2002. Bush’s Directive on Treatment of Detainees. Washington DC: The White House, 7 February, -- 07.pdf (visitato il 16 June 2011).
  62. Whitehead, John, & Steven H. Aden, 2002. Forfeiting “Enduring Freedom” for “Homeland Security”: A Constitutional Analysis of the USA Patriot Act and the Justice Department’s Antiterrorism Initiatives. American University Law Review, 51, 6: 1081-1133.

Domenico Tosini, Problemi costituzionali dell’antiterrorismo successivo al 2001: un’analisi socio-giuridica della detenzione di Guantánamo in "SOCIOLOGIA DEL DIRITTO " 1/2016, pp 29-51, DOI: 10.3280/SD2016-001002