When jurisdiction travels further than law |
The recent cross-border capture of a sitting head of state raises hard questions about enforcement jurisdiction, immunity and the use of force under international law.
Legal analysis requires a discipline different from political debate. It is not about declaring winners or assigning blame. It is about examining the legal structure that governs state conduct.
What are the limits of lawful power? And what happens when those limits are tested?
The present controversy turns on three settled pillars of international law: enforcement jurisdiction, use of force, and immunity. These are not technical abstractions. They mark the legal boundaries within which states are expected to operate, even when political pressure pushes outward.
The legal questions discussed here arise from the extraterritorial capture and transfer of a sitting head of state pursuant to a foreign criminal indictment. International law rarely operates in absolutes. It functions through nuance, exception and precedent, and must therefore be approached with restraint rather than........