Quite clearly, lack of an intent to commit a crime would not obviate such forms of criminal responsibility and orders or authorizations will not lessen criminal responsibility for conduct that is manifestly unlawful.
However, the creation of National Security Courts--aka. special 'terrorists' courts--as distinct from federal district courts to try cases involving torture as a crime against humanity would actually create legal loopholes that would perpetuate the use and implementation of an unlawful torture and interrogation program and further violations of due process as a customary right, according to Jordan Paust's "The Case Against a National Security Court," pursuant to a report by The Constitution Project titled "A Critique of 'National Security Courts,"' "In Pursuit of Justice: Prosecuting Terrorism Cases in the Federal Courts," by Human Rights First and Ben Davis' "Against a US 'Terrorists' Court.'"
However, the creation of National Security Courts--aka. special 'terrorists' courts--as distinct from federal district courts to try cases involving torture as a crime against humanity would actually create legal loopholes that would perpetuate the use and implementation of an unlawful torture and interrogation program and further violations of due process as a customary right, according to Jordan Paust's "The Case Against a National Security Court," pursuant to a report by The Constitution Project titled "A Critique of 'National Security Courts,"' "In Pursuit of Justice: Prosecuting Terrorism Cases in the Federal Courts," by Human Rights First and Ben Davis' "Against a US 'Terrorists' Court.'"
