Last Wednesday, Professor Ohlins spoke about criminal law, a topic with which I am not too familiar. First, he asked whether the recent bombing of the Afghan hospital should be considered a war crime, knowing we would all immediately jump to say “yes! How could the killing of the sick not be considered a crime?” Professor Olin, however, introduced the idea of proportionality, and said that one must consider the situation at hand– whether the “importance” of the target overrides the casualties of innocent civilians.

In response to a question about Assad, Professor Ohlin said that the world must “bring him to justice.” In high school, I grappled with the ambiguities of justice while serving on my school’s Honor Committee. With no “rulebook for judging cases,” we had to define what fairness meant in every situation, for each student, and for the community. When we seek to find justice on an international level, when citizens from all over the world likely have different definitions for right and wrong, how can we come to a consensus?