Examines the efforts of lawful nations to impose justice on those responsible for crimes against humanity and the limited success of international courts, and discusses the legal and ethical issues surrounding the status of Al Qaeda plotter Khaled Sheikh Mohammed.
"Since the Nuremberg Trials of 1945, lawful nations have struggled to impose justice around the world, especially when confronted by tyrannical and genocidal regimes. But in Cambodia, the USSR, China, Bosnia, Rwanda, and beyond, justice has been served haltingly if at all in the face of colossal inhumanity. International Courts are not recognized worldwide. There is not a global consensus on how to punish transgressors. Now the case of imprisoned senior Al Qaeda plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed raises issues--logistical, legal, and ethical--emblematic of the challenge posed to all nations and the international community. Should the U.S. seek the high ground and try to make its law apply to the stateless and lawless who would do it harm? Or would a civil, federal trial reward a war criminal with the rights of a U.S. citizen to which he is not entitled? Would a military tribunal be appropriate--legally, militarily, or morally? In this book, William Shawcross explores the visceral debate that these questions have provoked over the proper application of democratic values in a time of war"--Provided by publisher
|
