Mary Pauline Hilado

2-S

2013400049

December 10, 2014

PUBLIC ENEMY NUMBER ONE: OSAMA BIN LADEN

Justification on the Al Qaeda Leaders Death

Terrorism is one of problems yet to be solved today. It affects everyone and can take place
anywhere. Former United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan defined terrorism as any action
intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants, with the purpose of
intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or
abstain from doing any act. Under the United States Code, international terrorism is defined as
activities which involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law
and appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a
government by intimidation or coercion, or affects the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination or kidnapping (Federal Bureau of Investigation, n.d). A special law in the
Philippines (Republic Act No. 9372) provides that terrorism may be committed by any person who,
among others, commits and act punishable under Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law),
thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the
populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand (Amurao, 2013).
Terrorism is considered as a crime against humanity and terrorists are considered as hostis humani
generis or enemy of mankind for wanton killings, disregard for human life and bringing about
widespread fear and destruction. Terrorism violates human rights.
Thirteen years ago, on September 11, 2001, the world came to know of such violence that
would lead to thes unity of nations. It was during that day that the Al Qaeda, a network of Islamic
extremist groups, hijacked four commercial planes and bombed the World Trade Center
(commonly known as the Twin Towers) in New York City and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia,
the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense. Around 3,000 people died during
such attacks, attacks which were considered an act of war. The United Nations (UN) and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) recognized the attacks as armed attacks within the UN Charter
and NATO treaty. Ten years later, on May 1, 2011, Al Qaedas leader, Osama bin Laden, was killed in

Abbottabad, Pakistan by a team of US Navy Seals in an official mission (Operation Neptune Spear).
According to reports, the raid which led to the condemned leaders death was carefully planned by
the United States for years. The Seals cut the power in the neighbourhood to carry out the mission
and raided the three-storey building where bin Laden and men were staying. A firefight took place
and on the third floor of the building, the military men encountered bin Laden- he was cornered in
his bedroom together with his family and used his wife as a shield, however Robert ONeill, the Seal
who purportedly killed him, shot him twice in the forehead and once more when he fell to the floor.
Bin Laden was reportedly unarmed. Other members of bin Ladens family and group were also
killed in the process due to their resistance. Bin Laden was unceremoniously buried in the
Arabian Sea but within 24 hours after his death, under Islamic law. A DNA test confirmed that the
body was his and no pictures or videos were released per mandate by the United States. The only
personal reaffirmation was made by one of bin Ladens wives. The raid, however, was not made
known to the Pakistani government until bin Laden was dead. The Pakistani intelligence source and
the Al Qaeda itself confirmed his death after a few days. The news brought a sigh of relief all over
the globe; however, was bin Ladens killing actually justified?
One of the sources of international law is customs. Customary international law is a general
and consistent practice of states followed by them from a sense of legal obligation (Bernas, 2009). It
has two elements- the material factor or the practice of states, taking into account duration and
consistency; and the subjective factor, or the reason behind such behaviour. Specifically, an instant
custom is a spontaneous activity of a great number of states supporting a specific line of action.
In response to the 9/11 attacks, the United Nations formed a counter-terrorism council and
passed several relevant resolutions. UN Resolution 1368 condemned the attacks, justifying the acts
of self-defense of the United States and UN Resolution 1373 bound all of the United Nations
member states after it was adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and called for international
cooperation to combat threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts. UN
Resolution 1373 obliged member states to criminalize terrorist acts and financing, freeze terroristrelated funds and assets and deny safe haven to those affiliated with terrorist groups, prevent the
movement of the said groups and cooperate with other governments and international community
on the anti-terrorism front and be members to all terrorism-related conventions and protocols.
These resolutions gave the United States the consent to carry out the raid and the eventual killing of
Osama bin Laden.

Article 51 of the UN Charter further justifies the killing of bin Laden. It states: Nothing in
the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an
armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken
measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in
the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and
shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present
Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore
international peace and security. Such article is an exception to Article 2(4) on the prohibition on
the use of force in self-defense, affirmed in the Republic of Nicaragua vs The United States case
(1986) . The killing was an act of pre-emptive self-defense since bin Laden and his group posed an
imminent threat to peace and security of nations and nations have a right to defend themselves
against violence. Under the said article, a state may use force in self-defense if it has been attacked,
or if an armed attack is legitimately deemed to be imminent. The Caroline Test requires that the use
of force must be necessary because the threat is imminent and pursuing peaceful alternatives is not
necessary and the response must be proportionate to the threat. Hence, the killing of Osama bin
Laden is legal: the United States was attacked not as retaliation, but as a planned target; intelligence
information also discloses that bin Laden intended to assassinate President Barack Obama even
prior to the 2012 presidential elections. Furthermore, the Al Qaeda continues to be a threat to the
international community due to its suicide bombings and network of terrorist groups.
A counterargument would be the immediate shooting of bin Laden. Is it not that he should
be given a fair trial first and detained? The answer is simple: bin Ladens actions showed no signs of
surrendering to the military forces. When he saw them approaching, he retreated to his bedroom
and used his wife as his shield. As a high profile criminal and leader of a notorious terrorist group,
it is illogical that he is armed, though concealed, and even if he did submit himself to the forces, as
powerful as he is, there is no assurance that the Seals would successfully put him in custody. Bin
Ladens forces and reinforcements could have also killed the Seals in the process. Moreover, he is
considered as an unlawful enemy combatant under international law. An unlawful enemy
combatant is an individual who, under the laws and customs of war, may be detained for the
duration of an armed conflict which includes members of the Taliban and the Al Qaeda. Bin Laden,
as an unlawful enemy combatant, is not afforded with a prisoner of war status and does not receive
full protection of the Third Geneva Convention.

The Numberg Principles are a set of guidelines enunciating that no person, no matter what
their office, stands above international law (Sarmiento 2009). Principle VI enumerates the
following crimes, among others, as crimes against humanity: murder and inhuman acts done
against any civilian population. Though terrorism is not expressly classified under the principle, the
9/11 attacks consisted of mass murder and was intended to intimidate the civilian population, not
only in the United States but around the world. As the head of the Al Qaeda, and expressly
admitting that he was behind the attacks, bin Laden is a lawful target of the United States.
The killing of Osama may be a triumph for the terror-gripped society, but doubts are still
cast on his death. Since no evidence was shown to the public, merely testimonies and affirmations
of individuals, raises an uncertainty on the facts of the case.

Sources:

Bernas, J. (2009). Introduction to Public International Law. Rex Printing Company, Inc.:
Quezon City, Philippines.

Bowcott, O. (2011). Osama bin Laden: US responds to questions about killings legality. The
Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/may/03/osama-binladen-killing-legality

Bowden, M. (2012). The death of Osama bin Laden: how the US finally got its man. The
Guardian.

Retrieved

from

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/12/death-

osama-bin-laden-us

CNN Library (2014). Death of

Osama bin Laden Fast Facts. CNN. Retrieved

fromhttp://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/09/world/death-of-osama-bin-laden-fast-facts/

Daily Mail Reporter (2011). Kill Obama: bin Laden plotted to assassinate President before
2012

election.

Associated

Newspapers

Ltd.

Retrieved

from

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386813/Kill-Obama-Bin-Laden-plottedassassinate-President.html

De Vogue, A. (2011). Was Killing of Osama bin Laden Legal Under International Law? ABC
News.

Retrieved

from

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/osama-bin-laden-killing-legal-

international-law/story?id=13538365

Doebbler, C. (2011). The Illegal Killing of Osama bin Laden. Retrieved from
http://jurist.org/forum/2011/05/curtis-doebbler-illegal-killing-obl.php

Haynes, W. (2002). Enemy Combatants. Retrieved from http://www.cfr.org/internationallaw/enemy-combatants/p5312.

International Business Times (2011). Is Osama bin Laden killing legal? International Law
experts divided. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.com/osama-bin-laden-killing-legalinternational-law-experts-divided-282739

Lewis, A. (2011). Osama bin Laden: Legality of killing questioned. BBC News. Retrieved from
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-13318372

Sarmiento, R. (2009). Public International Law Bar Reviewer. Rex Printing Company, Inc.:
Quezon City, Philippines.

Silverleib, A. (2011). The killing of bin Laden: Was it legal? CNN. Retrieved
fromhttp://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/05/04/bin.laden.legal/

United Nations (2014). Chapter VII: Action With Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of
Peace,

and

Acts

of

Aggression.

Retrieved

from

http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml

United Nations Security Council (2014). Security Council Resolutions. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/resolutions/

Yoon, S. (2011). Was bin Ladens killing and burial legal? Al Jazeera. Retrieved from
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2011/05/201155113345557824.html