Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T09:43:10.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Due Process and the Iraq Sanctions: A Response to Devika Hovell

Part of: Devika Hovell, “Due Process in the United Nations”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Joy Gordon
Joy Gordon*
Affiliation:
Loyola University Chicago
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Devika Hovell raises deeply significant questions about the role of due process in the legitimacy of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Hovell gives us a fine-grained analysis of what exactly makes due process so compelling; in her approach, the reasons why it is compelling will vary in different contexts, depending upon the particular value and function it serves. In particular, she discusses three ways of articulating the values underlying due process, and the models of due process that would follow from each. She then discusses how her analysis would play out in two situations: The Council’s use of asset freezes, and the role of the UN in the cholera epidemic in Haiti. In her case studies, she looks at situations where due process has been insufficient, and discusses some of the UN’s attempts to remedy this, and the organizational difficulties in doing so.

Type
Symposium on Devika Hovell, “Due Process in the United Nations”
Information
AJIL Unbound , Volume 110 , 2016 , pp. 13 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2016

References

1 Hovell, Devika, Due Process in the United Nations, 110 AJIL 1 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 SC Res. 661 (Aug. 6, 1990).

3 Secretary-General, Letter Dated 20 March 1991 to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/22366 (Mar. 20, 1991).

4 Id.

5 Paul Conlon, memorandum, Historical Note on the Security Council’s Disputed Right to Ban Supplies of Foodstuffs to a State under Sanction, June 26, 1998.

6 Secretary-General, Letter Dated 20 March 1991 to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/22366, Annex, para. 8 (Mar. 20, 1991).

7 Schneider, Michael E., How Fair and Efficient is the UNC System? A Model to Emualte?, 15 J. Int’l Arb. 15 1, 2 (1998)Google Scholar.

8 Id. at 6.

9 Stauffer, Thomas R., Critical Review of UNCC Award for Lost Production and Lost Revenues, 44(5) Middle East Econ. Surv. (2001)Google Scholar.

10 Statement by Riyadh Al- Qaysi, United Nations Security Council, Provisional Verbatim Record of the 4336th Meeting, S/PV.4336 (Resumption 1), 17 (June 28, 2001).

11 Stauffer, supra note 9.

12 Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq, CASI Newsletter 5 (July 2002).

13 Ruling Party Blasts US Over Vaccines, Agence France-Presse (Mar. 13, 2001).

14 SC Res. 1409 (May 14, 2002), implementing the Goods Review List.