President Trump has announced a more protectionist foreign policy for America that risks endangering the norms and systems of international policy and foreign relations.
President Trump’s assumption of power stands to affect the current extradition proceedings of Turkish Cleric Fethullah Gulen. The executive and the judicial branches share power in extraditions, although the executive wields an outsized influence in the process. This blog post explores the legal issues surrounding Gulen’s case now that President Trump has assumed office. Little has happened in Turkey in the past year without President Recip Teyep Erdogan’s regime drawing some spurious connection to Gulen. From this past July’s coup attempt to the recent assassination of Russian ambassador Andrey Karlov, Gulen’s fingerprints, as Erdogan would have it, are all over the country’s recent political unrest. Gulen, a one-time political ally of Erdogan, has clashed with the president’s regime in recent years over accusations of corruption in Erodgan’s government by Gulen’s Turkish supporters. Gulen now stands accused of orchestrating this summer’s coup, along with offenses that seemingly predate that incident. Unsurprisingly, the Erdogan regime is doing everything in its power to pry Gulen away from the Pennsylvania compound where he has spent much of the last two decades. After a prolonged immigration battle with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (which Gulen won), the seventy-seven-year-old cleric is now set for a face off with an empowered Erdogan, fresh off his successful counter coup and seemingly bolder than ever. The Obama administration’s policy towards Turkey and Ergodan has led it to take a cautious, patient approach with regards to Gulen. The incoming Trump administration’s greater support for Ergodan, however, might mean a more forceful push toward extraditing Gulen. While the Obama administration carefully cultivated its relationship with Erdogan—who swept into office originally...
In a display of deference to Chinese law, the Second Circuit triggered questions on the future of international comity.
Political scandal surrounding Park Geun-hye, the first female president of South Korea, and Choi Sun-sil, a religious cult leader and friend of Park, have resulted in the national assembly’s passing of a motion to impeach her last month. The Constitutional Court is reviewing the motion and hearing arguments from the prosecution and the defense side to decide whether her charges merit impeachment.
The inauguration of U.S. President Trump calls into question America’s commitment to several international agreements. Notable among these is the Iran nuclear deal which Mr. Trump has called, “the worst deal ever negotiated.” Although a legal avenue potentially exists for challenging President Trump’s unilateral renouncement of the deal should he choose to do so, the future of the Iran nuclear deal under the Trump administration does not look particularly bright.
In September of 2016, the International Criminal Court secured its first conviction for destruction of cultural heritage, sentencing Ansar Dine’s Ahmad Al-Faqi Al-Mahdi to nine years behind bars. Al-Mahdi pled guilty to destroying over a dozen mausoleums and shrines in Timbuktu, many of which were UNESCO World Heritage Sites. His conviction establishes an interesting precedent for the ICC, in essence inviting similar cases in the future.
The Court of Justice of the European Union’s (CJEU) ruling last week that general mass surveillance programs are unlawful raises questions about the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act 2016 slated to go into effect on December 31, 2016. While this controversial ruling could pave the way for future legal attacks on the UK’s mass surveillance program within the British court system, the direct impact of the CJEU’s decision is unclear because of the UK’s forthcoming exit from the European Union.
Interview with Miodrag Ćakić, Field Team Coordinator at Info Park (a refugee center in Belgrade which specializes in protection, information, communication and education services) and a photographer about his experience on the field assisting migrants and some insight into the current refugee laws and practices in Serbia.
A change in the policy of barring refugees from jobs in the U.S. Federal Civil Service could mitigate challenges for the refugee population. The current policy is misguided from a humanitarian and economic perspective and potentially unconstitutional as it may be in conflict with U.S. obligations under the 1967 Protocol on the Status of Refugees.
A renewed effort is required to reform India’s civil aviation regulatory system based on the CAAI Act or an improved alternative. At the very least, legislative action is required to build a legal framework to support the rising flight path of India’s economy.