Partners in the War on Drugs: A Question of International Criminal Law

On Wednesday, President Obama hosted his second State Dinner at the White House, honoring Mexico’s President Felipe Calderón. Prior to the engagement, Obama and Calderón held a joint press availability to discuss the common issues shared by the neighboring countries. In addition to the highly controversial Arizona Immigration Law, the two leaders spoke of their mutual desire to confront and curb the violent influence of the drug cartels. President Obama spoke to this critical shared interest, stating:

President Calderón and I also reaffirmed our commitment to stand together against the drug cartels that have unleashed horrific violence in so many communities. Mr. President, you and the Mexican people have shown great resolve in a fight for the security and safety of your country. And as I’ve pledged to you before, Mexico can count on the United States as a full partner in this effort.

As your partner, we’ll give you the support you need to prevail. Through increased law enforcement on our side of the border, we’re putting unprecedented pressure on those who traffic in drugs, guns, and people. We’re working to stem the southbound flow of American guns and money, which is why, for the first time, we are now screening 100 percent of southbound rail cargo. And guided by our new National Drug Control Strategy, we’re bringing new approaches to reducing the demand for drugs in our country.

… I said the first time I met President Calderón and have said ever since that I greatly admire his courage, his dedication, his tenacity in trying to deal with the drug traffickers and cartels that have created such a public safety crisis in many communities within Mexico.

(Read the full transcript of remarks by the President here.)

Bruce Zagaris, author of the recently released International White Collar Crime: Cases and Materials, dissects one example of the crackdown on these cartels and shows the wide-ranging legal collaboration necessary to achieve a drug trafficking indictment.

——–

Mexico Extradites Alleged Drug King Quintero-Payan to U.S.

by Bruce Zagaris

Via INTERNATIONAL ENFORCEMENT LAW REPORTER

Volume 26, Issue 7, July 2010, p. 271

On April 23, 2010, the U.S. Attorney’s offices of Houston and San Antonio announced the extradition from Mexico of alleged drug kingpin Juan Jose Quintero-Payan, 68. Quintero-Payan contested extradition for eight years. Mexico extradited him to San Antonio to answer a four-count indictment alleging his responsibility for $20 million in various cash movements. Although he would be eligible for a life sentence, Mexico stipulated as part of the extradition order that he would not be sentenced to life imprisonment. The indictment alleges Quintero was the head of a criminal enterprise whose operations included South America, Mexico, the United States and the Cayman Islands during the years of approximately 1978 to 2002, when the superseding indictment was filed.

Rethinking the History of Early American Law: Kathryn Preyer’s “Blackstone in America”

Boston, MA: Thursday, April 15 (6:00 p.m. Reception. 6:30 p.m. Event.): Mary Sarah Bilder, co-editor of Blackstone in America: Selected Essays of Kathryn Preyer — reviewed here — will be speaking at a great program organized by the Massachusetts Historical Society: “Rethinking the History of Early American Law: Kathryn Preyer’s ‘Blackstone in America.’” Also featuring [...]

The Court-Martial: A Lawful Alternative

The Al-Qaeda Seven controversy is all over the news. At the center of the debate are Justice Department attorneys who once represented terrorism detainees. Maligned by some for being un-American, their patriotism and their values called into question, and defended by others for protecting the liberties of unpopular clients, the story of the Al-Qaeda Seven calls into question the fundamental constitutional boundaries of our government.

Ultimately, though, these Seven are a conduit for a larger conversation that we need to be having about the prosecution of suspected terrorists: Where should we try members of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban? Jordan J. Paust, author of Beyond the Law: The Bush Administration’s Unlawful Responses in the “War” on Terror, asks just that in a new op-ed for Jurist. With vim, vigor, and vision, he suggests that we must look beyond the two forums offered by the Obama Administration – federal district court or US military commission – to consider a third option: military court-martial.

Mark Manger on Rorotoko

Preferential trade agreements have exploded in number over the past decade. But what do they really achieve? Mark Manger explains the ins and outs of international trade for Rorotoko, and manages to make international law fascinating in the process.

What Ukraine’s Election Means for Democracy

via Foreign Affairs – author Lucan Way on the Ukraine election:

In 2004, the world watched as the Orange Revolution unfolded in Ukraine, pitting an insurgent, pro-Western opposition, led by Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko, against a pro-Russian autocratic government, represented by Viktor Yanukovych. After months of protest, Yushchenko became president in January 2005. Last month, the three faced off against one another in the first round of presidential elections. Yushchenko lost badly, with Yanukovych and Tymoshenko coming out on top, receiving 35 percent and 25 percent of the vote, respectively. A runoff election between the two was held on February 7 to determine Ukraine’s next president.

For both better and worse, this election marks a sharp break from 2004: Ukraine is now less dominated by a choice between East and West, yet more mired in rampant cynicism and fears of institutional and political chaos.