Security in the Constitutional State

6 ECTS credits
150 h study time

Offer 2 with catalog number 4023663ENR for all students in the 1st semester at a (E) Master - advanced level.

Semester

1st semester

Enrollment based on exam contract

Impossible

Grading method

Grading (scale from 0 to 20)

Can retake in second session

Yes

Taught in

Dutch

Faculty

Faculty of Law and Criminology

Department

Metajuridica

Educational team

Jean-Marc Piret (course titular)

Activities and contact hours

26 contact hours Lecture

Course Content

In this course the security subject will be examined from the perspectives of the history of ideas and of legal philosophy and political philosophy. First we will look at the evolution of thinking about security. Is security a fundamental right of every individual or is it a responsibility that should be fulfilled by the state as a duty of care?

The next issue put under scrutiny will be whether combatting terrorism effectively presupposes a state of exception, whether explicit through the temporary suspension of certain constitutional provisions or in a more disguised manner by introducing successive levels of “terrorist threat” that give the authorities access to increasing power to curtail civil liberties. In this type of emergency situations executive power increases and the backward-looking perspective of retributive penal law is progressively substituted by the proactive perspective of risk management and prevention. This tendency can be monitored in the increasing amount of executive measures of coercion designed to combat terrorism and in the growth of penal provisions directed towards the repression of criminal preparation.

In the second part of the course the American counterterrorism strategy after 9/11 will be critically analysed, with special attention to the militarization of the penal law section directed towards terrorism. After 9/11 unchecked executive power grew out of proportion in the U.S. and this has been justified by lawyers and legal theorists on the basis of a lesser evil ethics and different variants of the “ticking bomb scenario”. The state of exception initially put in place in order to combat terrorism effectively in an emergency situation, gradually became normalized. Even the use of special interrogation techniques that were clearly torture (light) have been justified by the lawyers of the Office of Legal Council. This issue will be put under scrutiny from a philosophical and ethical perspective. We will also analyse several Supreme Court cases about habeas corpus, in which the Court restored the system of checks and balances and sent out the message that the government should abide by the rule of law in combatting terrorism.

In the subsequent part of the course the American counter terrorism strategy by using military drones will be studied concisely. The already mentioned “militarization” of penal law and the American drone war exemplify the crisis of international law of armed conflict.

Finally in a guest lecture attention will be focused on the justification of violence by IS and on the strategy of seduction of IS directed to young Muslims living in European countries and to the emotional and motivational aspects in the process of radicalisation.

Course material

Digital course material (Required) : Veiligheid, terrorisme en mensenrechten, Een reader met teksten, Canvas

Additional info

A digital reader will be available in Canvas.

Learning Outcomes

General competencies

This course is a classical “ex cathedra” course. Students can ask questions and start a discussion. The aim of the course is to arouse their interest in subjects of legal philosophy and to stimulate a reflexive attitude in the study of the relation between liberty and security.

Grading

The final grade is composed based on the following categories:
Written Exam determines 100% of the final mark.

Within the Written Exam category, the following assignments need to be completed:

Written Exam with a relative weight of 1 which comprises 100% of the final mark.

Additional info regarding evaluation

Written exam: multiple choice exam.

Allowed unsatisfactory mark

The supplementary Teaching and Examination Regulations of your faculty stipulate whether an allowed unsatisfactory mark for this programme unit is permitted.

Academic context