ILNews

ND Law hosts "What is war?"

IL Staff
January 1, 2007
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
"What Is War?" is the name and subject of a conference at the Hesburgh Center for International Studies Auditorium at the University of Notre Dame Sept. 14 and 15. The University of Notre Dame Law School, the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, and Mershon Center for International Security Studies at Ohio State University are sponsoring the conference. It is free and open to the public.

The discussions will feature Gen. Sir Michael Rose (British Forces, retired), and Gen. William Nash (U.S.A., retired), former commanders in Bosnia, along with a distinguished roster of political scientists, international lawyers, peace researchers, war correspondents, ethicists, and historians. Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, CSC, president emeritus of Notre Dame, will be on hand for opening remarks.

The forum will address how to define war, going beyond the academic question and addressing basic human rights, including the right to life, the right to a trial, the right to own property.

"At the moment there is no clear legal line dividing the two situations," the event's Web site states. "Governments tend to deny that fighting on their territories is war, arguing instead that it is 'criminal activity,' and claiming that they have it under control. Following the Sept. 11 attacks, the United States reversed the trend, declaring war where many would see crime."

This interdisciplinary conference is an outgrowth of an International Law Association study group charged with addressing the legal challenges raised by the Bush Administration's "global war on terror."

A tentative agenda and speaker biographies are available on the event's Web site http://kroc.nd.edu/events/07meaningofwar.shtml. For more information, contact the Joan B. Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, (574) 631-6970.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Don't we have bigger issues to concern ourselves with?

  2. Anyone who takes the time to study disciplinary and bar admission cases in Indiana ... much of which is, as a matter of course and by intent, off the record, would have a very difficult time drawing lines that did not take into account things which are not supposed to matter, such as affiliations, associations, associates and the like. Justice Hoosier style is a far departure than what issues in most other parts of North America. (More like Central America, in fact.) See, e.g., http://www.theindianalawyer.com/indiana-attorney-illegally-practicing-in-florida-suspended-for-18-months/PARAMS/article/42200 When while the Indiana court system end the cruel practice of killing prophets of due process and those advocating for blind justice?

  3. Wouldn't this call for an investigation of Government corruption? Chief Justice Loretta Rush, wrote that the case warranted the high court’s review because the method the Indiana Court of Appeals used to reach its decision was “a significant departure from the law.” Specifically, David wrote that the appellate panel ruled after reweighing of the evidence, which is NOT permissible at the appellate level. **But yet, they look the other way while an innocent child was taken by a loving mother who did nothing wrong"

  4. Different rules for different folks....

  5. I would strongly suggest anyone seeking mediation check the experience of the mediator. There are retired judges who decide to become mediators. Their training and experience is in making rulings which is not the point of mediation.

ADVERTISEMENT