http://www.ejiltalk.org/habib-v-commonwealth-of-australia-a-twist-on-actions-against-state-officials-for-torture/ Blog of the European Journal of International Law Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:55:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 http://www.ejiltalk.org/habib-v-commonwealth-of-australia-a-twist-on-actions-against-state-officials-for-torture/comment-page-1/#comment-10495 Case Watch: Australia’s Complicity in Torture—An Update | Open Society Foundations Blog – OSF | WorldWright's … Sat, 22 Oct 2011 14:16:02 +0000 http://www.ejiltalk.org/?p=1984#comment-10495 [...] his detention, Habib says that he was repeatedly tortured. His case was based on claims that Australian officials provided information that was used during [...] [...] his detention, Habib says that he was repeatedly tortured. His case was based on claims that Australian officials provided information that was used during [...]

]]> http://www.ejiltalk.org/habib-v-commonwealth-of-australia-a-twist-on-actions-against-state-officials-for-torture/comment-page-1/#comment-10228 Case Watch: Australia’s Complicity in Torture—An Update | Open Society Foundations Blog - OSF Fri, 14 Oct 2011 16:46:46 +0000 http://www.ejiltalk.org/?p=1984#comment-10228 [...] his detention, Habib says that he was repeatedly tortured. His case was based on claims that Australian officials provided information that was used during [...] [...] his detention, Habib says that he was repeatedly tortured. His case was based on claims that Australian officials provided information that was used during [...]

]]> http://www.ejiltalk.org/habib-v-commonwealth-of-australia-a-twist-on-actions-against-state-officials-for-torture/comment-page-1/#comment-8110 Australia to Investigate Habib Abduction – But Why Now? Sun, 26 Jun 2011 13:29:20 +0000 http://www.ejiltalk.org/?p=1984#comment-8110 [...] That matter was not settled until March last year. Mr Habib was successful in a case against the Australian Government in February 2010, although it seems that the decision might not easily act as Case law for any [...] [...] That matter was not settled until March last year. Mr Habib was successful in a case against the Australian Government in February 2010, although it seems that the decision might not easily act as Case law for any [...]

]]> http://www.ejiltalk.org/habib-v-commonwealth-of-australia-a-twist-on-actions-against-state-officials-for-torture/comment-page-1/#comment-4843 Australia’s Complicity in Torture: No More Excuses | Open Society Foundations Blog Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:29:43 +0000 http://www.ejiltalk.org/?p=1984#comment-4843 [...] he was held from May 2002 until he was released without charge in January 2005. During this period he claims that he was repeatedly tortured, and that Australian officials provided information which was used during his interrogations and [...] [...] he was held from May 2002 until he was released without charge in January 2005. During this period he claims that he was repeatedly tortured, and that Australian officials provided information which was used during his interrogations and [...]

]]> http://www.ejiltalk.org/habib-v-commonwealth-of-australia-a-twist-on-actions-against-state-officials-for-torture/comment-page-1/#comment-1199 Jeffrey Davis Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:02:28 +0000 http://www.ejiltalk.org/?p=1984#comment-1199 This is an extremely interesting post. Note that civil cases under the Alien Tort Statute are not so far apart from rulings in other countries on the question of immunity. Like the UK in the Jones case, US Courts have consistently held that states are immune from suit under the ATS (See Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess, Von Dardle v. USSR, Joo v. Japan). Current state officials have also been protected by immunity in ATS cases (Wei Ye v. Zemin, Tachiona v. Mugabe). Courts have been far less likely to accept immunity claims from former officials - and this is the issue before the Supreme Court in Samantar. For a complete overview of the issues surrounding ATS cases, and the forces involved in litigating these cases, see my book, "Justice Across Borders" (Cambridge University Press 2008). This is an extremely interesting post. Note that civil cases under the Alien Tort Statute are not so far apart from rulings in other countries on the question of immunity. Like the UK in the Jones case, US Courts have consistently held that states are immune from suit under the ATS (See Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess, Von Dardle v. USSR, Joo v. Japan). Current state officials have also been protected by immunity in ATS cases (Wei Ye v. Zemin, Tachiona v. Mugabe). Courts have been far less likely to accept immunity claims from former officials – and this is the issue before the Supreme Court in Samantar. For a complete overview of the issues surrounding ATS cases, and the forces involved in litigating these cases, see my book, “Justice Across Borders” (Cambridge University Press 2008).

]]>