Dynamism and the erosion of procedural safeguards in international governance of terrorism

Abstract

Contemporary international governance of terrorism reflects a conceptualisation of terrorism as a global public problem that both affects and needs to be responded to by all sectors of global society. Consequently, counter-terrorism has taken the form of proactive risk management that involves the regulation of various mundane activities of governmental and private actors, such as financial transactions, the production, management and trade of arms and dangerous materials, air and maritime transport, border management, immigration and custom procedures.

This thesis asserts that dynamism is not only an academically interesting model of international governance, but it is also a practically alarming one. By surveying the areas of counter-terrorism financing, the control of arms and weapons, and the cross-border movement of persons and good, the thesis shows that while dynamism enables the adventurous pursuit of functional robustness in these areas, it systematically produces and entrenches harm on individuals and businesses, particularly in the Global South. The thesis further highlights trends in the discourse and practice of the United Nations Security Council and the Financial Action Task Force to show the simultaneous erosion of procedural mechanisms that safeguard the rights and interests of non-state actors. The combination of dynamism and erosion of procedural safeguards, the thesis posits, allows for maximum functional expediency and minimum accountability in international governance of terrorism.