東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

The Legality Under International Hum...

Khusifan, Abdullah Adnan.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The Legality Under International Human Rights Law and The Customary International Law of The Security Detention Enforced for The Terrorist Rehabilitation Programs of Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	The Legality Under International Human Rights Law and The Customary International Law of The Security Detention Enforced for The Terrorist Rehabilitation Programs of Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia./
作者:	Khusifan, Abdullah Adnan.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2019,
面頁冊數:	242 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 81-03, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International81-03A.
標題:	International law. -
電子資源:	https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=13809750
ISBN:	9781085636810

The Legality Under International Human Rights Law and The Customary International Law of The Security Detention Enforced for The Terrorist Rehabilitation Programs of Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia.
Khusifan, Abdullah Adnan.

The Legality Under International Human Rights Law and The Customary International Law of The Security Detention Enforced for The Terrorist Rehabilitation Programs of Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2019 - 242 p.

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 81-03, Section: A.

Thesis (S.J.D.)--American University, 2019.

This item is not available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

The study focuses of legal issues related to rehabilitation programs that have been adopted by some governments as part of their counter-terrorism strategy. Individuals who harbor radical ideologies are placed, by executive order, in these programs in order to be deradicalized. The establishment of such programs arose from the recognition that fighting homegrown terrorism by means of police power alone is insufficient. The police power only treated the symptoms but not the disease. Furthermore, granting the police extraordinary power to detain individuals will result in an extreme increase in the number of detainees under security detention and tip the balance between liberty and security too far in the direction of security. Rehabilitation programs are seen as a solution to these various problems. These programs are designed to counter toxic ideology and provide a means of releasing detainees and safely reintegrating them into society. This study finds that subjecting suspected terrorists who have done nothing but believe in an extremist ideology; or who have been imprisoned for a terrorism-related crime and served their sentences but are deemed to be too dangerous to be released; or who have been charged with terrorist crimes but have not yet been sent to trial, to terrorist rehabilitation programs without judicial due process or habeas corpus violates the standards of lawful detention as it prescribed in the international human rights law and amounts to arbitrary detention. However, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia have not ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), therefore they cannot be held in violation of any treaty obligation regarding the ICCPR. Nevertheless, arbitrary detention may constitute a violation of customary international law. The author presumed that the prohibition against arbitrary detention has acquired the status of a customary norm of international law. On the contrary, the research has found that legal opinion is mixed concerning the question of whether the prohibition against arbitrary detention is a customary norm of international law. There seems to be no scholarly consensus on the question. The question as to whether the prohibition against arbitrary detention is a customary norm of International Law has not been definitively settled.

ISBN: 9781085636810Subjects--Topical Terms:

560784
International law.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Arbitrary detention

The Legality Under International Human Rights Law and The Customary International Law of The Security Detention Enforced for The Terrorist Rehabilitation Programs of Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia.
LDR:04225nmm a2200553 4500 001 2277412
005 20210521101951.5
008 220723s2019 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781085636810
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI13809750
035 $a AAI13809750
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Khusifan, Abdullah Adnan. $3 3555727
245 1 4 $a The Legality Under International Human Rights Law and The Customary International Law of The Security Detention Enforced for The Terrorist Rehabilitation Programs of Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2019
300 $a 242 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 81-03, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Goldman, Robert K.
502 $a Thesis (S.J.D.)--American University, 2019.
506 $a This item is not available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a The study focuses of legal issues related to rehabilitation programs that have been adopted by some governments as part of their counter-terrorism strategy. Individuals who harbor radical ideologies are placed, by executive order, in these programs in order to be deradicalized. The establishment of such programs arose from the recognition that fighting homegrown terrorism by means of police power alone is insufficient. The police power only treated the symptoms but not the disease. Furthermore, granting the police extraordinary power to detain individuals will result in an extreme increase in the number of detainees under security detention and tip the balance between liberty and security too far in the direction of security. Rehabilitation programs are seen as a solution to these various problems. These programs are designed to counter toxic ideology and provide a means of releasing detainees and safely reintegrating them into society. This study finds that subjecting suspected terrorists who have done nothing but believe in an extremist ideology; or who have been imprisoned for a terrorism-related crime and served their sentences but are deemed to be too dangerous to be released; or who have been charged with terrorist crimes but have not yet been sent to trial, to terrorist rehabilitation programs without judicial due process or habeas corpus violates the standards of lawful detention as it prescribed in the international human rights law and amounts to arbitrary detention. However, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and Malaysia have not ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), therefore they cannot be held in violation of any treaty obligation regarding the ICCPR. Nevertheless, arbitrary detention may constitute a violation of customary international law. The author presumed that the prohibition against arbitrary detention has acquired the status of a customary norm of international law. On the contrary, the research has found that legal opinion is mixed concerning the question of whether the prohibition against arbitrary detention is a customary norm of international law. There seems to be no scholarly consensus on the question. The question as to whether the prohibition against arbitrary detention is a customary norm of International Law has not been definitively settled.
590 $a School code: 0008.
650 4 $a International law. $3 560784
650 4 $a International relations. $3 531762
650 4 $a Peace studies. $3 3172392
650 4 $a Ethnic studies. $2 bicssc $3 1556779
653 $a Arbitrary detention
653 $a Human rights
653 $a Radical Islamism
653 $a Radicalization
653 $a Saudi Arabia
653 $a Security detention Administrative detention
653 $a Prohibition against arbitrary detention
653 $a Right to liberty
653 $a Customary international law
653 $a Political Islam
653 $a Salafism
653 $a Salafist Jihad
653 $a Preventive detention
653 $a Malaysia
653 $a Singapore
653 $a Rehabilitation programs
653 $a Denazification
653 $a Counter-terrorism strategy
690 $a 0616
690 $a 0631
690 $a 0563
690 $a 0601
710 2 $a American University. $b Washington College of Law. $3 2106157
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 81-03A.
790 $a 0008
791 $a S.J.D.
792 $a 2019
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u https://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=13809750