tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post8708122256601486699..comments2024-03-20T17:53:33.153-04:00Comments on Global Military Justice Reform: Why military courts?Eugene R. Fidellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14694139458443207131noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4070126256373578912.post-1994610792346321252017-01-14T17:59:43.201-05:002017-01-14T17:59:43.201-05:00Thanks for bringing that to our attention. In my v...Thanks for bringing that to our attention. In my views, this story illustrates three major points:<br /><br />1) It's not because you have a 'military court' on paper that you have a 'military court' in real life. (See: Roscoe Pound,"Law in Books and Law in Action" (1910)). My thoughts are with Pakistan jurists who try to make it happen.<br /><br />2) In the world, you have military courts and military courts. In other terms, all military courts cannot be put in the same basket by those who are opposed to military jurisdiction. You need at least, a model to compare features according to standardized factors. Such model assists in identifying where you might need reforms;<br /><br />3) More broadly, we need to keep an eye on this because if what Mr. Sattar reports is true, it is likely to create undue resentment which might be counter-effective over the long run in the global effort against terrorism. A fallacy of Rule of Law is as bad as if there were no Rule of Law at all.Pascal Lévesquehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15708349994971868363noreply@blogger.com