Use of Force, and International Humanitarian Law

I. Background

On August 9, 2010, Rwandans voted in national presidential elections. At the time of writing, the incumbent President Paul Kagame is an almost certain victor. International news coverage of the election has been consistent in its reference to a string of violent incidents and arrests, which many observers have sought to qualify as acts of intimidation directed against political opponents in the lead-up to the elections.[1]

Introduction

Introduction

The recent Supreme Court decision in Samantar v. Yousuf[1] definitively resolved one major question about the immunities of foreign government officials from civil suits in U.S. courts; at the same time, it left several others wide open. It thereby guaranteed that the source, scope, and certainty of such immunities will continue to be litigated energetically. This Insight explores some of the questions that will likely figure prominently in that litigation.

Introduction

Introduction

Introduction

The 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) provides the exclusive framework for deciding when foreign governments are entitled to immunity from suit in U.S. courts. [1] Over the years, the Supreme Court has played an integral role in interpreting the statute. This week, the Court once again faces the task of resolving a fundamental question about the FSIA's scope.

Introduction

I. Introduction

Introduction

Introduction