| dc.contributor.author | METTRAUX, Guenael | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-07-26T15:10:56Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-07-26T15:10:56Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2007 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Journal of international criminal justice, 2007, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 59-66 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1478-1395 | |
| dc.identifier.issn | 1478-1387 | |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/1814/42748 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Both the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the US Military Commissions were set up to respond to extraordinary judicial challenges. But while the Yugoslav Tribunal has sought to uphold internationally-recognized standards of human rights, the 2006 Military Commissions have amputated many of these rights and created serious procedural impediments for defendants. In so doing, the drafters of the 2006 Act have ignored a long and respectable American legal tradition prevailing from Nuremberg to the ICTY. | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.relation.ispartof | Journal of international criminal justice | |
| dc.title | Comparing the comparable : 2006 Military Commissions v. the ICTY | |
| dc.type | Article | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1093/jicj/mql099 | |
| dc.identifier.volume | 5 | |
| dc.identifier.startpage | 59 | |
| dc.identifier.endpage | 66 | |
| eui.subscribe.skip | true | |
| dc.identifier.issue | 1 | |