Author Description

Much attention has been paid to the perceived unfairness of the US court-martial system and the need for its reform. Some scholarly works addressing the need for improvement have cited changes in the British court-martial as examples of successful reform. The transformation of the British system was, in part, brought about by the findings of the European Commission and European Court of Human Rights in Findlay v. United Kingdom that the United Kingdom system violated the fair trial guaranteed contained in the European Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. However, few have considered the possibility that the US system could undergo a similar review by the European Court of Human Rights. At least one author has cited among his reasons for not making a comparative analysis between the British and the American military justice systems the fact that the protection offered under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms are not identical to the protections offered to US citizens under the United States Constitution. While this is true, it does not rule out the possibility that the European Court of Human Rights could examine the US system to ensure that the protections guaranteed by the European Convention are provided prior to allowing an exercise of jurisdiction over an individual accused of committing an offense in a nation which is a signatory to the Convention. This paper considers this possibility and addresses the potential affects of such a review on US-European security relations. This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in t