Emory International Law Review

Volume 33Issue 3

Fighting the “Three Evils”: A Structural Analysis of Counter-Terrorism Legal Architecture in China

Enshen Li | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 311 (2019)

In the aftermath of September 11 attacks, China has not been immune to the global trend of destructive terrorism. However, China’s perceptions of terrorism and legal responses to it greatly diverge from those of other countries. This Article first seeks to understand the cause, source, and impact of terrorist threats in China, known as “Three Evils”—terrorism, extremism, and separatism, through a critical inquiry of the country’s ethnic and religious policies. It then proceeds to delineate China’s legal framework for combating the “Three Evils” to explore the cultural characteristics of the government’s approach against these rising threats. Tracing the evolution of the country’s counter-terrorism laws and policies, this Article argues that China has developed an operational infrastructure composed of four strands to fight terrorism: crackdown, criminalization, control, and cooperation. This framework of “four Cs” operates within a vertically coordinated system by deploying diverse strategies and measures to regulate terrorism-related acts according to their level of severity and risk. While crackdown and criminalization serve mainly as reactive responses to terrorist violence through repression and retribution, control and cooperation are largely used as pre-emptive instruments to prevent substantial terrorist acts through incapacitation and community policing.

Read More »

Deporting Dreamers as a Crime Against Humanity

William Thomas Worster | 33 Emory Int'l L. Rev. 367 (2019)

Much has been written about the “DREAMers” (Dreamers) and their moral claim to a right to remain in the United States and the legal mechanisms by which such a moral right might be realized. What has not been explored is whether their removal from the United States might implicate international law, and, specifically, whether it would constitute a crime against humanity. On its face, it seems to be an outrageous claim: that deporting non-citizens from a state would be a criminal act. International law protects a State’s ability to remove unlawfully present aliens. This is not in debate. The argument is, however, far narrower. Specifically, the forcible, arbitrary deportation of Dreamers with an intent to permanently remove them from their residence, which is protected under international law, would be criminal.

Read More »