Can Civil Lawsuits Deter Terrorism and Compensate Victims?
The book’s editor, Professor John Norton Moore, is an expert on national security and international law at the University of Virginia provides. In his introduction — perhaps the most interesting segment of the book — Moore mentions two goals that civil lawsuits against terrorists, terrorist organizations, and terrorist states could further: deterrence and compensation. Moore notes, for example that “there is substantial evidence that the problem of war and terrorism is a deadly synergy between a nondemocratic decision elite and an absence of effective deterrence.” By a “nondemocratic decision elite,” he is referring to actors such as the Taliban or al Qaeda. By “the absence of effective deterrence,” he is referring to the inability to prevent some terrorist attacks — including devastating ones such as September 11’s, or the recent Madrid bombings. Deterrence could be improved, Moore argues, if we can convince terrorists that the result of the acts will be that “they . . . will be he
Related Questions
- How do I protect my assets in several developing countries for risks like terrorism or civil strife, or a change in government that could deprive me of the use and force me to abandon them?
- Did the Japanese government compensate its victims of military sexual slavery?
- Can Civil Lawsuits Deter Terrorism and Compensate Victims?
