Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Nov. 24 that a proposed provision in Thailand's constitution would permit the nation's military to commit human rights abuses without fear of punishment, in violation of international treaties. A new constitutional provision before Thailand's legislative body, known as the the junta, or the National Council for Peace and Order, would exculpate the use of force by military personnel if the conduct is "carried out with honest intention" in the interest of national security. HRW referred to the constitutional amendment as a "license to kill." HRW acknowledged that Thailand's military forces have acted with impunity for decades, but stated: "International human rights treaties ratified by Thailand make clear that status as a government official does not permit immunity for serious rights violations. In addition, Thailand has international legal obligations to ensure the right to an effective remedy for victims of serious violations, including unlawful killings."

The US Department of Defense (DoD) and Pentagon officials have completed their investigation into the Oct. 3 bombing of the Doctors Without Borders (MSF) hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan and announced on Nov. 25 that it was an "avoidable accident caused primarily by human error." Commander of US forces in Afghanistan, Gen. John Campbell, stated that the hospital was targeted accidentally, and US personnel believed they were attacking a separate structure containing enemy combatants several hundred meters away. The investigation found that personnel did not complete full precautionary measures to verify the building was a "legitimate military target." Systems and procedural failures compounded the human error, resulting in the hospital bombing that killed over 30 and injured dozens. Military service members who were most closely involved in the bombing have been suspended, but Campbell declined to state how many.

The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit  on Nov. 23 released its ruling that the US government may keep secret memoranda related to the legal justification for the use of drones for targeted killings of those in other countries believed to be involved in terrorism. Though the opinion was drafted last month, it was placed under temporary seal and not released until this week. The case was the result of Freedom of Information Act requests by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and New York Times for documents prepared by the Office of Legal Counsel of the US Department of Justice regarding the drone strikes. The court made a point of emphasizing that the legality of the strikes themselves was not the issue before the court, and that its review primarily concerned whether documents regarding their lawfulness must be disclosed. Those arguing for the release of the memos called the documents "working law," but the courts denied this argument.

The United Nations Security Council on Nov. 20 unanimously adopted a new resolution (PDF) calling on all member states to fight to eradicate ISIS. Introduced by France in the wake of the Paris attacks that claimed 129 lives, the resolution asks states to do what they can to destroy ISIS safe havens in Syria and Iraq. Characterizing ISIS as "a global and unprecedented threat to international peace and security," the Security Council warned that further attacks are expected, given recent ISIS attacks in Tunisia, Turkey, over Egypt with the downing of a Russian plane, and in Beirut and Paris. By a 15-0 vote in favor, the Security Council pledged to attack all terror organizations in the Iraq and Syria region, including Nusrah Front, both with physical force and by working to crack down on foreign fighters joining the cause and by blocking financing.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) said Nov. 20 that a Saudi Arabia court has sentenced Palestinian poet Ashraf Fayadh to death for apostasy or abandoning his Muslim faith. The organization's researcher in the Middle East, Adam Coogle, said that he had seen the trial documents and confirmed the death sentence. According to Coogle, Fayadh's original sentence was four years in prison and 800 lashes, but this changed after another judge revised the sentence to death three days ago when the case was brought for retrial after Fayadh's appeal was dismissed. According to Mona Kareem, a migrant rights activist from Kuwait, Fayadh's identification documents had been confiscated during his arrest in January 2014, after which the judges and prosecutor for his case were changed. Kareem said that the new judge passed the verdict without even speaking to Fayadh. Kareem speculated that Fayadh is in reality being punished for posting a video online showing the Mutaween (religious police) lashing a man in public. According to Fayadh, he has no legal representation and has been given 30 days to appeal against his ruling.

The French National Assembly voted Nov. 19 to extend the state of emergency for another three months. The state of emergency expands police power for searches and arrests, and allows authorities to restrict movement of individuals and vehicles with the country's borders. During the debate, Prime Minister Manuel Valls warned that France must be prepared to defend against chemical and biological warfare. The bill secured 551 votes with only six against, far surpassing the 279 necessary to pass the legislation through the chamber. The bill will now move to the Senate, where it is expected to pass.

The UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) released a 37-page report (PDF) Nov. 16 calling on those with ground-level control to declare that recent acts by the Islamic State (ISIS) and other militants will not be tolerated and "to immediately take action to stop acts in breach of international human rights and humanitarian law." The report highlights that against the background of factional infighting and the breakdown of the justice system, ISIS has gained control over large areas of Libya and committed such atrocities as public beheadings for political or religious affiliation, amputations and floggings. Several Libyan armed groups have pledged allegiance to ISIS and are actively fighting against both the internationally-recognized fovernment and other factions that have not declared such allegiance. The report outlines other abuses such as arbitrary civilian abduction, property destruction and looting, inhumane incarceration and torture performed by ISIS and other armed groups, and classifies these events as potential war crimes.

Bangladesh has asked Amnesty International (AI) to retract its criticism of the country's execution plans for opposition politicians convicted of war crimes at a local tribunal. In 2013 the International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh (ICTB) convicted Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid, a senior politician from Jamaat-e-Islami and Salauddin Quader Chowdhury, a leader of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party, of war crimes committed during Bangladesh's war of independence in 1971. Their convictions and subsequent death sentences were upheld earlier this year, and the two men filed review petitions to be heard by the country's top court on Nov. 17. AI stated that the trials of the men "failed to meet international standards." It also noted, "in the government's haste to see more war crimes convicts executed, both men were subjected to a speeded up appeals' process. The UN has stated the ICT fails to meet international fair trial standards."