Questions abound as the U.S. and its allies start to outline a framework for an effective, appropriate, and just venue for the prosecution of international terrorists and their associates.

• What is the legal basis for the use of force by the U.S. and what are the relevant principles in the law of armed conflict for the pursuit of terrorists and their allies?
• Are U.S. military tribunals an appropriate option for prosecuting terrorists responsible for the 9/11 attacks? How can military and civilian tools complement each other?
• What can other legal mechanisms (e.g international or Islamic courts) contribute to the effort to bring terrorists to justice?
• What are the next steps in building the international legal framework for the war on terrorism?

This presentation was webcast live and followed by questions from the floor and the Internet audience.

Panel

• Eugene R. Fidell
  President, National Institute of Military Justice
• Michael J. Matheson
  Senior Fellow, U.S. Institute of Peace & Legal Consultant to the U.S. Department of State
• David Scheffer
  Senior Fellow, U.S. Institute of Peace & Former U.S. Ambassador for War Crimes Issues
• John Yoo
  Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice

Moderator

• Neil Kritz
  Director, U.S. Institute of Peace Rule of Law Program