Hollande would order executions of terrorists in foreign countries

The news that the President of the French Republic, Hollande would have ordered the physical elimination of some prominent radical terrorists, without the support of the French judiciary, and in collaboration with the US administration of President Obama, requires some thoughts on the matter. If this practice may seem usual, and sometimes justified, as a preventive tactic, it is impossible not to consider the various aspects that are involved. This measure, in fact, involves the violation of a series of standards, both internal to the French law, to the international, that any opportunity reasons are not enough to justify, especially in a state, like the French, but this also applies to the American one, which calls itself a democracy and is proposed as a model to follow. The number of targeted assassinations would be about forty, an amount that goes beyond this single episode, however, also be condemned, and apparently a practice that has taken on a certain tradition, as a resolution of a factor certainly serious problem. In terms of domestic law it is clear that it is an order obtained exclusively by the executive power without the support of the judiciary, which has not endorsed these measures with appropriate judgments, however, impossible in France since the death penalty was abolished. President Hollande would thus impeachable for these actions; also the president had publicly acknowledged, some months before, to have personally ordered the physical elimination of terrorists: this could also result in violation of state secret. On the international level it is clear that were violated norms of international law, because these operations have been carried out outside the jurisdiction of the French and of territories whose sovereignty belonged to the governments of those countries. The theater of the executions would be the nations of Mali, Syria, Ethiopia, Libya and Egypt, countries where French interests were, and are strategic. Even in the event that the deletions had been agreed with the governments of those countries is no doubt that the French extraterritorial activity was illegitimate. There is then a rating of political character, as well as a practical character, from which it can not escape. Politically, the decision to take these actions would receive the just condemnation, if it had been made by a right-wing government, that have been carried out by a government, which defines the left and that should ensure the application of certain rights and certainty to move within the confines imposed by the laws, represents a clear defeat, as well as a contradiction in terms. At the international level the prestige of the French government and France itself can not but appear compromised, because of the obvious violation of the law to which the country relies. From a practical point of view the ordered deletions have avoided France a wave of attacks and victims of which has been the subject; certainly it can be argued that without these executions France could suffer an even greater terrorist pressure, however the use of these measures highlights a worrying French Weakness Prevention: in fact, the perception is that the physical elimination of terrorists, if it occurred in actions and not in clashes or fighting, is the last resort they will use to protect the country's strategic or vital interests of the country, without having any alternative, other. Just the number, quite substantial, made of selective deletions, complaint, at least, a willingness to resort to extreme option as a means virtually usual action. The question to ask is whether a European country and Europe itself, may defer to these means and to accept these solutions, without viable alternatives within the current legislation? The question is difficult to solve, because it is necessary as you will want to consider an allied country, whose government violates its own rules and those of the international law, perhaps it would be appropriate, that Brussels undertook efficient even with regard to these cases.