Distinction Matters: Rethinking the Protection of Civilian Objects in Non-International Armed Conflicts

2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noam Zamir
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Equal Protection ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Law And Order ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Armed Opposition Groups

Under treaty law all civilian objects are protected in international armed conflicts (IAC) whereas it is only certain civilian objects that enjoy protection under treaty law in non-international armed conflicts (NIAC). However, it is commonly argued that all civilian objects are protected in NIAC under customary law. This article examines the reasons for the differences in the protection of civilian objects under treaty law and the argument that customary law now provides equal protection for all civilian objects under both IAC and NIAC. The article argues that this equal protection may hinder the ability of states to maintain law and order under their domestic law in NIAC in situations where they may need to destroy property which belongs to armed opposition groups. The article advances the argument that the law regarding targeting should be that all civilian objects are protected in NIAC but, unlike the protection of civilian objects in IAC, this protection does not bar a state from destroying in its territory objects which were considered to be illegal under domestic law before the commencement of the NIAC, in accordance with international human rights law as lex specialis.

The Influence of the Two Covenants on States Parties Across Regions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Besson
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Domestic Institutions ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Third ◽  
International Human ◽  
Domestic Influence ◽  
Domestic Law

As a companion to the five regional reports in this volume, this chapter’s aim is a double one: first, to bring the comparison up to the regional level, and second, to analyse the international and domestic institutions, procedures, and mechanisms that affect how international human rights instruments influence domestic law. The chapter is therefore both a study in comparative international human rights law and a contribution to its methodology. Its structure is four-pronged. The first section clarifies the aim, object, and method of the comparison. The second section presents a comparative assessment of the Covenants’ domestic influence across regions and develops a grid of comparative analysis. The third section addresses the authority of the Committees’ interpretations of the Covenants, relying on a bottom-up comparative law argument. The fourth section discusses the role of human rights comparison and of regional human rights law in enhancing the legitimacy of the Committees’ future interpretations.

III. ASSASSINATION AND TARGETED KILLING—THE KILLING OF OSAMA BIN LADEN

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (3) ◽  
pp. 778-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
APV Rogers ◽  
Dominic McGoldrick
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
The Us ◽  
Osama Bin Laden ◽  
Domestic Law

Osama Bin Laden was killed on 2 May 2011 in the course of an operation by US special forces (Navy Seals) in Abbottabad, Pakistan.1 The US forces were flown by helicopter from neighbouring Afghanistan. The death of Bin Laden renewed questions about the legality of such operations during armed conflicts and during peacetime.2 The potentially applicable law includes international humanitarian law, international human rights law, jus ad bellum and the domestic law of the US and Pakistan.3

International Human Rights Law

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Civilized Society ◽  
The U.S

This chapter focuses on the two sources of international law: custom and treaties. Customary international law is the term used to describe rules that are so widely accepted and so deeply held that they help to define what it means to belong to a civilized society. The question of whether customary international law is binding on the United States came before the U.S. Supreme Court as long ago as 1900 in a case called Paquete Habana. Whereas treaty law often covers the same ground as customary international law. Torture is forbidden by customary international law, for example, and prohibitions against torture are also set forth in several multilateral treaties. The effect is to reinforce recognition that a particular norm set forth in a treaty has the status of customary law.

Prisoners Dilemma: Ascertaining and Augmenting the Multinational NIAC Detention Regime

2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 436-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yateesh Begoore
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Treatment Standards ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Prisoners Dilemma ◽  
Comprehensive Framework

While International Humanitarian Law (IHL) contains a comprehensive framework of rules and procedural protections for detainees in international armed conflicts (IACS), there is a conspicuous absence of such rules and protections for detainees in the case of non-international armed conflicts (NIACS). In fact, as the recent Serdar Mohammad v. Ministry of Defence case pointed out, the rules pertaining to NIACS make no mention of detention authority at all, leading some scholars to conclude that International Human Rights Law (IHRL), and not IHL, governs NIAC detention. Contrarily, this paper contends that not only does IHL govern (as well as grant authority for) NIAC detentions, the regime’s shortcomings regarding procedural safe-guards and treatment standards may be remedied through the application of the Copenhagen Process Principles – as evolutive interpretation or interpretation based on subsequent agreement – to Common Art. 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

Translating International Law into Domestic Law, Policy, and Practice

2020 ◽  
pp. 113-132
Author(s):  
Gillian MacNaughton ◽  
Angela Duger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
Judicial Actions ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Subnational Governments

This chapter provides an overview of the means through which international human rights law is translated into domestic law, policy, and practice. To have an influence on public health, international human rights law must be translated into domestic action. As international human rights law is largely state centered, it relies upon national and subnational governments to implement it—to promote and protect human rights and to provide remedies to victims of human rights violations. Based upon international rules on domestic implementation, there are four general approaches to translate international law into domestic action: human rights education, policymaking, judicial actions, and engagement with international human rights mechanisms. National and subnational governments use these four approaches to translate international human rights law into domestic law, policy, and practice for health, while nongovernmental organizations and international human rights mechanisms play important roles in monitoring these processes.

Protecting the Environment during Multinational Military Operations

2019 ◽  
pp. 322-344
Author(s):  
Onita Das
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Ongoing Work

The chapter examines issues concerning the protection of the environment during multinational military operations. Taking into consideration the International Law Commission’s (ILC) recent work regarding the protection of the environment in relation to armed conflicts, this contribution devotes particular attention to the preventive and remedial measures suggested in the Special Rapporteur’s reports. The chapter does, however, go beyond the ILC’s ongoing work on environmental protection in the context of armed conflict by extending its focus on exploring how multinational military operations generally—that is whether within or outside of armed conflicts—are influenced by other bodies of international law, namely international criminal law, international environmental law, and international human rights law.

International Human Rights Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 94-116
Author(s):  
Aryeh Neier
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
The Status ◽  
Civilized Society ◽  
The U.S

This chapter discusses custom and treaties as the two sources of international law. It explains the customary international law as the term used to describe rules that are widely accepted and deeply held and are used to define what it means to belong to a civilized society. It also recounts the case called “Paquete Habana” in the U.S. Supreme Court that addresses the question of whether customary international law is binding on the United States. The chapter talks about the treaty law or conventional law as the source of multilateral conventions that often covers the same ground as customary international law. It analyzes the prohibitions against “torture” that are set forth in several multilateral treaties and reinforce recognition that a particular norm set forth in a treaty has the status of customary law.

The Application of International Human Rights Law in Non-International Armed Conflicts

2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marie Kamatali
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Three Solutions ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human

Since the end of the Cold War, the world has experienced a decrease in international conflict and a significant increase in non-international armed conflict (niac). Despite this change, however, international law has been very slow in adapting its laws that initially were crafted with international armed conflict in mind to the new niac environment. There is a growing recognition that international humanitarian law (ihl) is not well equipped to deal with issues of human rights violations committed during niac. New efforts to make international human rights law (ihrl) applicable in such conflicts have, however, raised more questions than answers. There is still no consensus on whether international human rights law applies to niac. Furthermore, the question on whether non-international armed groups are bound by international human rights obligations remains controversial. This article tries to analyze where international law stands now of these questions. It proposes steps international law could follow to move from its current rhetoric to a more practical solution on these questions. The three solutions proposed are: individual agreements to respect human rights during armed conflict, the possibility of an icj advisory opinion and the option of a protocol additional to international human rights treaties relating to their application in niac.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document