1. 1 23
Human Rights Review
ISSN 1524-8879
Hum Rights Rev
DOI 10.1007/s12142-015-0360-8
Global Justice and Due Process by Larry
May
Candice Rowser

2. 1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and all
rights are held exclusively by Springer Science
+Business Media Dordrecht. This e-offprint
is for personal use only and shall not be self-
archived in electronic repositories. If you wish
to self-archive your article, please use the
accepted manuscript version for posting on
your own website. You may further deposit
the accepted manuscript version in any
repository, provided it is only made publicly
available 12 months after official publication
or later and provided acknowledgement is
given to the original source of publication
and a link is inserted to the published article
on Springer's website. The link must be
accompanied by the following text: "The final
publication is available at link.springer.com”.

3. BOOK REVIEW
Global Justice and Due Process by Larry May
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011
Candice Rowser1
# Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015
In Global Justice and Due Process, Larry May discusses the need for a more solid
international legal system to fully enforce the procedural rights (also called due process,
the process or steps taken to arrive at a decision) first established in the 1215 English
Magna Carta. For May, due process rights align with both modern, international human
rights. He uses the cases of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Bagram,
Afghanistan, as well as people living in refugee camps, as examples of people who
fall between the cracks. May states that he has been motivated to do this analysis by
Bthe idea that some people have been denied the protection of legal subject status^
(197). He articulates the need for an international legal system in which procedural or
due process rights are protected regardless of citizenship status or state jurisdiction.
May begins the book with a discussion of the Magna Carta and outlines its potential
as a model for global procedural justice. This document is essential to May because it is
a foundation for the United States Bill of Rights (1791), which has also been associated
with the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Prior
to the Magna Carta, there was no uniform or centralized legal system in England.
May’s usage of England’s Magna Carta is vital because it shows the possibility for a
centralized international legal system that could make governments more accountable
for enforcing the UDHR and human rights norms. Some of the rights articulated in the
Magna Carta intersect with the articles of the UDHR and the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Those rights as expressed in the Magna Carta
include four rights that May declares are fundamental law that relate to modern
international law: the right to trial by jury, the right to habeas corpus, the right to not
be dispossessed of citizenship, and the right to not be exiled or outlawed randomly
(today non-refoulement). We see close connections within the UDHR, for instance, to
Article 9 (No one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest), Article 10 (Everyone is entitled in
Hum Rights Rev
DOI 10.1007/s12142-015-0360-8
* Candice Rowser
Candice.Rowser@kbcc.cuny.edu
1
Kingsborough Community College, CUNY, History, Philosophy, Political Science D309, 2001
Oriental Boulevard, Brooklyn, NY 11235, USA
Author's personal copy

4. full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal), and
Article 11 (Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed
innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial).
The two most important of the Magna Carta rights as applied to the cases of
detainees and refugees are the right to habeas corpus and non-refoulement. Detainees
at Guantanamo find themselves officially outside of the jurisdiction of their countries of
origin and that of the country that detained them; they are outlaws in that they must
exist outside of any official law system. In order to create a global legal system in
which no one would find themselves outlawed, May identifies a multidimensional
approach. He proposes fortifying institutions already in place, such as human rights
commissions and councils at both regional and international levels. He also sees the
need for forming a world court of equity and outlining a global administrative set of
rules, or procedures and practices that uphold accountability. Human rights commis-
sions, councils, and courts would allow individuals to file petitions appealing for
habeas corpus and non-refoulement.
May’s argument is a timely one, given the impacts of technological development,
international crime, and terrorism. Governments around the world want to limit and
eventually eliminate all chances for terrorist activity, leading governments such as the
United States aim to detain individuals suspected of taking part in terrorism. At the
same time, there cannot be a situation in which people are left outside of the laws of the
countries that have accused them of a crime, nor can they be dispossessed of rights (as
May has argued is the case with detainees at Guantanamo Bay). An international legal
system with strong institutions—and countries with a commitment to upholding
universal legal standards—is needed. Current events highlight why May’s work, in
which he seeks to Bprovide a theoretical framework to advance the development of
global fairness and the international rule of law^ (234) is significant, valuable, and
relevant.
C. Rowser
Author's personal copy