On Tuesday, Amnesty International, the global human rights organization, said that patterns of attack conducted by forces on both sides of the battle between ISIS and the Iraqi-American coalition violated international law in Mosul.

The report was released a day after Iraqi Prime minister Haider al-Abadi declared victory for the Iraqi-led forces in the ISIS stronghold city of Mosul almost three years since the the terrorist group captured the city.

A long and bloody nine months of fighting between the forces led to not only thousands of innocent deaths, but caused hundreds of thousands to be displaced from the city.

Amnesty International’s report claims that many of those deaths were not simply casualties of war, rather they were the result of  seemingly indiscriminate and reckless attacks conducted by members from both sides of the conflict. Lynn Maalouf, Director of Research for the Middle East at Amnesty International, expressed the importance of justice for the citizens of Mosul:

The horrors that the people of Mosul have witnessed and the disregard for human life by all parties to this conflict must not go unpunished. Entire families have been wiped out, many of whom are still buried under the rubble today. The people of Mosul deserve to know, from their government, that there will be justice and reparation so that the harrowing impact of this operation is duly addressed.

In its report, Amnesty describes how ISIS forced citizens of Mosul into new areas of the city to effectively use them as “human shields.” By relocating citizens to the western part of Mosul, ISIS created a barrier between its fighters and the Iraqi-American coalition. ISIS was able to keep civilians there by welding doors shut and booby trapping exits, and fighters would kill anyone who tried to escape.

On the flip side, the U.S. and Iraqi coalition chose to use weapons that were much too powerful for their intended targets or take the necessary precautions to protect civilians when conducting attacks. For example the report states on March 17 a U.S. airstrike that targeted two ISIS snipers ended up killing 105 innocent civilians. The report charges that the coalition failed to “adapt their tactics” and ended up doing significantly more harm than necessary.

Military officials from the Pentagon have so far rebuffed the alleged violations of international law. Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend said in a press conference:

I would challenge the people from Amnesty International or anyone else out there who makes these charges to first research their facts and make sure they’re speaking from a position of authority.

Next steps at this point are unknown. Holding states liable for their actions during wartime is difficult, even more so when non-state actors like ISIS are involved. But U.N. officials have said that accountability will be sought for the situation in Mosul.

James Levinson

James Levinson is an Editorial intern at Law Street Media and a native of the greater New York City Region. He is currently a rising junior at George Washington University where he is pursuing a B.A in Political Communications and Economics. Contact James at staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post War Crimes in Mosul?: Amnesty Claims All Parties Violated International Law appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Amnesty International: 13,000 People Secretly Executed in Syrian Prison

A new report from Amnesty International, called Human Slaughterhouse, reveals the horrific conditions in Saydnaya prison near Damascus. According to the report, in a secret crackdown on dissent, the regime hanged up to 13,000 people between 2011 and 2015, often executing groups of 50 prisoners at the same time. Amnesty outlines how prisoners are systematically deprived of food, water, and medical care, and are physically and mentally tortured. According to Amnesty, if prisoners spoke while they were being tortured or looked at the guards, they could be sentenced to death. Most of the prisoners are ordinary citizens opposed to the brutal regime. The report states that these kinds of atrocities are probably still going on today, authorized by the Syrian government.

Syrian authorities are systematically exterminating civilians in #Saydnaya prison. Let’s hold them accountable: https://t.co/n9jkJZYpL9 pic.twitter.com/D4aHpauX1a

— AmnestyInternational (@amnesty) February 7, 2017

“The horrors depicted in this report reveal a hidden, monstrous campaign, authorized at the highest levels of the Syrian government, aimed at crushing any form of dissent within the Syrian population,” said Lynn Maalouf, Deputy Director for Research at Amnesty International’s Beirut office.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: February 7, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

The World’s Scariest GOTV Strategy?

A historically black church in Greenville, Mississippi was set on fire late Tuesday night and vandalized with the words “Vote Trump” spray-painted on the façade. Most of the damage was to the main building and no people were hurt. But the community is in shock over what reminds many of hateful attacks in the 1950’s and 60’s.

Black Church in Mississippi Burned Down, ‘Vote Trump’ Painted on It https://t.co/vTcPtZs72F pic.twitter.com/HUBpCy8PFB

— CitizenSlant (@CitizenSlant) November 2, 2016

Many fear that this is only the beginning of what could happen if Trump is elected president. But at the same time some crazy people think it was staged by Democrats to place blame on the Republicans.

Just like the 1960’s, #Democrats are burning churches to scare and intimidate Black Voters who are voting for Trump https://t.co/SSm317UFfL

— P. J. (@Portosj81J) November 2, 2016

The Trump campaign made sure to dissociate itself from that message.

Trump campaign statement on Mississippi church arson pic.twitter.com/d6PnyVuHBR

— Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) November 2, 2016

Rant Crush

RantCrush collects the top trending topics in the law and policy world each day just for you.

The post RantCrush Top 5: November 3, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

Every day, people all over the world are executed for a wide variety of crimes. Though in the west it is mostly used to punish serious crimes like murder, in some places you can be executed for who you sleep with, how you dress, or if you have a different opinion from your government. Some countries execute people who were underage at the time of committing a crime and some do it to the mentally ill. Monday, October 10 marks the World Day Against Death Penalty.

Some countries still use the death penalty for homosexuality.

Let’s stand with our LGBTQI friends on the 10th October for World Day Against the Death Penalty #NoDeathPenalty #LGBTQI pic.twitter.com/ZOabAGG9Iz

— Rainbow Amnesty (@AI_LGBTQI_NSW) October 6, 2016

Amnesty International is committed to abolishing the death penalty worldwide and presents some of the main arguments for why. The fact is that by sentencing someone to death, you are denying the person’s right to life–which was established in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Additionally, because mistakes do happen, there have been several cases when an innocent person has been executed. There is also no proof that the use of the death penalty reduces the crime rate in a country. It is a discriminatory practice; death sentences are more likely to to be given to someone from a religious or racial minority as well as the poor and those who cannot afford an expensive lawyer for a lengthy trial.

Lastly, the risk that it is used as a political tool to quiet dissent in countries with a deeply corrupt justice system is too big.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a statement on Monday:

Let us be clear: participation in peaceful protests and criticism of a government–whether in private, on the Internet, or in the media–are neither crimes nor terrorist acts. The threat or use of the death penalty in such cases is an egregious violation of human rights.

World Day Against the Death Penalty – AI calls on Indon authorities to end DP and review all DP cases https://t.co/MppoXbz5et pic.twitter.com/0Y5Otj7jc3

— Amnesty Int’l (@AIIndoTimor) October 10, 2016

The U.N. Secretary-General also pointed out that although many countries seem to believe the death penalty is an effective way to handle terrorism, by scaring off future assailants, it actually has the opposite effect. He said:

This is not true. Experience has shown that putting terrorists to death serves as propaganda for their movements by creating perceived martyrs and making their macabre recruiting campaigns more effective.

Many Twitter users expressed their opposition to the practice.

On the World Day Against Death Penalty,I hail all those who were executed by #Iran‘s regime in the battle for freedom #NoDeathPenalty

— Maryam Rajavi (@Maryam_Rajavi) October 10, 2016

Places like China and Iran frequently execute people who dare to stand up against the government or reveal unflattering depictions of what life is like there. According to the most recent numbers from Amnesty International, Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia account for almost 90 percent of all recorded executions in 2015. But this percentage does not include China, where thousands of people are believed to be executed each year, though data on executions is considered a state secret and is highly classified. The data also shows that last year saw the highest number of executions worldwide in 25 years.

Killing in the name of justice? Mapping death penalty https://t.co/z7eN42lrJk #NoDeathPenalty #WorldDayAgainstDeathPenalty @WCADP @amnesty pic.twitter.com/G9kP9IIQCG

— Benjamin Hennig (@geoviews) October 10, 2016

Salil Shetty, Amnesty International’s Secretary General said in a statement:

The rise in executions last year is profoundly disturbing. Not for the last 25 years have so many people been put to death by states around the world. In 2015 governments continued relentlessly to deprive people of their lives on the false premise that the death penalty would make us safer.

California has a particularly high number of prisoners on death row–prisoners who have been sentenced to death but not yet executed. Only 13 people have been executed since the death penalty was reinstated in 1978, and nearly 750 remain on death row. In November, Californians will vote on two ballot initiatives that will change the state’s death penalty practice. Proposition 62 would repeal the death penalty entirely, and Proposition 66 would change the current system to speed up the appeals process to reduce the number of prisoners on death row. If both pass ,the initiative with the most “yes” votes will become law.

California, we’ve fallen far behind the times. It’s time to end the death penalty for good. RT if you agree. https://t.co/F3ZjwbrgfM pic.twitter.com/l5qpQ0CBXk

— Yes On 62 (@yeson62) October 9, 2016

According to Amnesty International, the United States has the fifth highest number of executions worldwide, following China, Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Last year, it was also the only country in the Americas to actually perform an execution. We share a place on a list of countries that are infamous for violating human rights, while our neighboring countries and Europe got rid of this practice many years ago. It makes you wonder, does the death penalty really have a place in the United States in the 21st century?

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post World Day Against Death Penalty: Do Executions Belong In the 21st Century? appeared first on Law Street.

Two women departed from the Dublin Airport at 6:30 in the morning on Saturday. They arrived in Manchester, England, and immediately commuted to an abortion clinic. The women live-tweeted their journey from the account @TwoWomenTravel. The abortion-seeking woman–accompanied by her friend–was one of thousands of Irish women each year who leave their home country each year in hopes of getting the procedure elsewhere. Most commonly, that elsewhere is Wales or England. Abortions are illegal in Ireland, with an exception for cases where the mother faces immediate death.

#twowomentravel boarding, it’s chilly. @EndaKennyTD pic.twitter.com/mffXYkpI71

— Two Women Travel (@TwoWomenTravel) August 20, 2016

According to the pair’s final tweet, their purpose for live-tweeting the journey was as follows: “We wanted to show the very ordinariness of the situation-we wanted to show it for what it is; a series of waiting rooms, moments in transit, a sequence of tediums protracted by stigma. No filters, no monologues, just the facts.”

Her abortion was successful–though not after getting turned away from one over-crowded clinic–but the discomfort of journeying away from home for an otherwise routine procedure that is unrestricted in many countries around the world, especially in Europe and the West, was poignant. Since 1983, Ireland–a heavily Catholic country–has outlawed abortions via its constitution’s Eighth Amendment. In 2012, after a woman died when doctors refused her the procedure, an exception was made to the Eight Amendment for women whose lives were in immediate danger.

Now a waiting room,weighted by bated breaths.@EndaKennyTD we could be home by noon in another world. #twowomentravel pic.twitter.com/1Sqytx6pgM

— Two Women Travel (@TwoWomenTravel) August 20, 2016

All others, like the two that flew to England over the weekend, must travel abroad to legally procure an abortion. Those who illegally undergo the procedure in Ireland face up to 14 years in prison. Amnesty International, a human rights organization, deems Ireland’s abortion law as “one of the world’s most discriminatory and punitive.”

In 2015, nearly 3,500 Irish women traveled to Wales or England for an abortion, according to the Irish Family Planning Association. Between 1980 and 2015, roughly 167,000 Irish women traveled to a country abroad seeking an abortion. And though the number of Irish women getting abortions abroad steadily rose from 1980 to the early 2000s, they have been in decline since 2004, and recent annual figures are comparable to those in early 1980s.

Not the first or the last bleeding women about to face a long treck home @EndaKennyTD #twowomentravel pic.twitter.com/08q2CQE3Yw

— Two Women Travel (@TwoWomenTravel) August 21, 2016

Enda Kenny, Ireland’s prime minister, has remained silent on his country’s abortion law, which many have been protesting and demanding a referendum to repeal the amendment. Not everybody was happy about the two women live-tweeting their trip to England. Cora Sherlock, the spokeswoman for Pro Life Campaign Ireland, sent out a tweet on Saturday that said: “It is deeply disturbing that the ending of the life of an innocent, vulnerable human being is being live-tweeted today. Very sad.”

But Simon Harris, the Irish government’s minister for health, took to Twitter to thank @TwoWomenTravel for  “telling story of reality which faces many.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Irish Woman Seeking Abortion Abroad Livetweets Journey appeared first on Law Street.

The United States is running out of lethal injection drugs. European pharmacies have refused to sell any more of their pentobarbital or other such supplies to America after they received information that the drugs were being used to kill inmates. Most of the E.U. has abandoned the use of capital punishment; the U.S. is the only Western country that still carries out executions.

As followers of the American penal system and/or fans of Gone Girl know, the rules regarding capital punishment vary from state to state. At present, 32 states in the U.S. enforce the death penalty, including Utah and Texas.

Lawmakers are seeking “back ups” to lethal injection. Utah Governor Gary Herbert signed a bill on Monday that allows death row prisoners to be killed by firing squad when execution by lethal injection is not available.

Read More: Lethal Injection Crisis: How States Are Solving the Problem

What are the procedures for a firing squad execution, you may ask? Officers volunteer to be part of a three-person shooting team. The anonymous trio shoots at a target over the inmate’s heart. One of the three guns that is used is loaded with a blank round, so nobody knows exactly which officer killed the inmate.

Read More: It’s Time to Bring Back the Firing Squad

If you are part of the 55 percent of Americans who support the death penalty for convicted murderers, you might agree with Fordham Law Professor Deborah Denno’s evaluation of death by firing squad:

It’s the only method we have in this country for which people are trained to kill. It appears the death is the quickest.

Other methods of capital punishment have also been discussed. The electric chair, death by hanging, and gas chambers were ruled out. Judge Alex Kozinski expressed his views on the use of another controversial killing method:

The guillotine is probably best, but seems inconsistent with our national ethos.

If you are an American who is not in favor of the death penalty, you might support exploring the other alternative—eliminating capital punishment altogether. Organizations such as Amnesty International are looking to get rid of the death penalty in America and educate people about the politics of its capital punishment system.

The change of policy in Utah has brought national attention to issues of justice and morality within the U.S. prison system. Will this issue incite a push for reform? Perhaps it is necessary to re-evaluate our country’s “national ethos,” to borrow a phrase from Judge Kozinski.

Corinne Fitamant

Corinne Fitamant is a graduate of Fordham College at Lincoln Center where she received a Bachelors degree in Communications and a minor in Theatre Arts. When she isn’t pondering issues of social justice and/or celebrity culture, she can be found playing the guitar and eating chocolate. Contact Corinne at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Death by Firing Squad Now Legal in Utah appeared first on Law Street.

The Iranian government executed a woman on Saturday for murdering a man who she said attempted to sexually assault her. After several delays of her execution and despite condemnation from human rights organizations, the Iranian government went forward with hanging Reyhaneh Jabbari.

Jabbari, 26, admitted in 2009 to killing 47-year-old Dr. Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi in self-defense, claiming that he tried to rape her. Sarbandi was killed in 2007, when Jabbari met with him on the pretense that she, an interior designer, would evaluate his office for a renovation, the New York Times reported.

Under Iranian law, Jabbari technically should have been in the clear for killing Sarbandi. As a Slate article explains, the Iranian death penalty doesn’t have to apply in a murder case if the murder was in retaliation to another crime punishable by death, such as rape. Jabbari maintained that she killed Sarbandi after he attempted to rape her. However, the judges are given very broad discretion in interpreting the facts of the case – so broad, in this case, that Jabbari was found guilty.

Beyond the fact that Jabbari’s is technically innocent even if she killed Sarbandi, that shouldn’t even matter considering the circumstances of her admission. Jabbari admitted to the murder “under duress possibly amounting to torture,” U.N. human rights investigator Ahmed Shaheed said in a press release, adding that acts of sexual violence should always be fought, no matter what. Shaheed said that if Jabbari was telling the truth, she was attacked by the Iranian justice system in addition to her assault:

If her allegations are true, Ms. Jabbari may have been doubly victimized; first by her attacker, and then by the judicial system, which is supposed to protect victims of intended and actual sexual and physical assault.

An online petition in March bore more than 240,000 signatures urging Iran not to execute Jabbari. The government then delayed the execution from April until this month. As the new date approached, supporters of Jabbari took to Facebook and Twitter to get attention to stop the execution. The day before the execution,  Amnesty International wrote that Jabbari’s side story wasn’t fairly judged. “Her claims do not appear to have ever been properly investigated,” Amnesty wrote in a blog post.

Iran has one of the highest execution rates in the world. According to an August United Nations report, the country executed at least 852 people, including at least eight who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes, during the period from June 2013 to June 2014. The report says Iranians can face the death penalty for “adultery, recidivist alcohol use, drug possession and trafficking” plus “enmity against God,” which is viewed by the Iranian government as when “a person brandishes or points a weapon at members of the public to kill, frighten and coerce them.”

All this might leave some wondering how hard it is not to get executed in Iran. In the larger scheme of things – for the Iranian justice system, that is – Jabbari is just another number.

—

Zaid Shoorbajee (@ZBajee)

Featured Image courtesy of [The Pondering Moose via Flickr]

Zaid Shoorbajee

Zaid Shoorbajee is a an undergraduate student at The George Washington University majoring in journalism and economics. He is from the Washington, D.C. area and likes reading and writing about international affairs, politics, business and technology (especially when they intersect). Contact Zaid at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Reyhaneh Jabbari: Another Victim of Iran’s Harsh Death Penalty appeared first on Law Street.