War under transnational surveillance: framing ambiguity and the politics of shame

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
PASCAL VENNESSON
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Quantitative Studies ◽  
Behavioural Effects ◽  
Israel Defence Force ◽  
Naming And Shaming

Abstract‘Naming and shaming’ those accused of abuse and misconduct is one of the most common strategies of transnational activists. Yet both qualitative and quantitative studies show that the policy and behavioural effects of naming and shaming are often contradictory. Named and shamed actors do respond at least partially by adjusting their policies and behaviour to some extent, but the actions challenged publicly as human rights violations may not cease and can even become more widespread. This ambivalent outcome is usually explained by the uneven capacity of the target to reform or by its ‘strategic’ response to escape the consequences of naming and shaming. By contrast, I show that naming and shaming can be brought to a standstill when the frame used by transnational activists is ambiguous. I trace the role of framing ambiguity during the Human Rights Watch (HRW) ‘naming and shaming’ campaigns against the Israel Defence Force (IDF) in the course of the July–August 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war (Lebanon war), and the December 2008–January 2009 Israel-Hamas war (Gaza war). I argue that HRW's use of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as a frame led to an argumentative deadlock (frame implication contest). This legal frame, and the process of legal framing, did genuinely constrain the IDF, affecting its operations and behaviour. However, the ambiguity of the frame also provided the IDF with a range of material and ideational assets that gave it scope to claim that its actions were actually in conformity with applicable law, and to justify continuing to use force in densely populated areas.

The Role of Necessity in International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 225-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence Hill-Cawthorne
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Current Article ◽  
The Relationship

The nature of armed conflict has changed dramatically in recent decades. In particular, it is increasingly the case that hostilities now occur alongside ‘everyday’ situations. This has led to a pressing need to determine when a ‘conduct of hostilities’ model (governed by international humanitarian law – IHL) applies and when a ‘law enforcement’ model (governed by international human rights law – IHRL) applies. This, in turn, raises the question of whether these two legal regimes are incompatible or whether they might be applied in parallel. It is on this question that the current article focuses, examining it at the level of principle. Whilst most accounts of the principles underlying these two areas of law focus on humanitarian considerations, few have compared the role played by necessity in each. This article seeks to address this omission. It demonstrates that considerations of necessity play a prominent role in both IHL and IHRL, albeit with differing consequences. It then applies this necessity-based analysis to suggest a principled basis for rationalising the relationship between IHL and IHRL, demonstrating how this approach would operate in practice. It is shown that, by emphasising the role of necessity in IHL and IHRL, an approach can be adopted that reconciles the two in a manner that is sympathetic to their object and purpose.

The International Committee of the Red Widget? The Diversity Debate and International Humanitarian Law

2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 614-647 ◽  
Author(s):  
René Provost
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Diversity ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Cultural Relativism ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
The Impact

This article asserts there has been a lack of attention to the impact of cultural diversity within the field of international humanitarian law. Discussions surrounding culture in international humanitarian law have nearly always avoided the central issue of cultural particularism. This has been so in relation to the debate surrounding the emblem, in general surveys of humanitarian law, and in discussions of the laws of war in distinct legal and cultural traditions. The emblems debate, in particular, signals the elusiveness of rigid universality within international humanitarian law. Five elements are suggested to explain the resistance of humanitarian law to contagion by the cultural relativism debate in human rights: the nature of human rights, the distinct normative frameworks of human rights and humanitarian law, the unified conventional basis of humanitarian law, the very broad participation in the humanitarian regime, and the unique role of the International Committee of the Red Cross. While these reasons might explain the fact that the relativism debate in human rights did not readily transfer to humanitarian law, they offer no substantive basis for immunity for humanitarian law to the challenges posed by cultural diversity. Ultimately, the article proposes a legal pluralist approach that recognizes the role of actors in the cultural process of norm-creation. Given the continued violation of the laws of war, the author suggests a need to open the door to cultural diversity in order to generate greater compliance. Without cultural legitimacy, there is a danger that humanitarian law aspires to self-defeating universalism.

scholarly journals IUS Post Bellum and The Imperative to Supersede IHL

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 193-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pablo Kalmanovitz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The One

In recent debates about the interplay between international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights law (IHRL), two broad camps have emerged. On the one hand, defenders of what may be called the convergence thesis have emphasized the inclusion of basic rights protections in the so-called “Geneva instruments” of IHL, as well as the role of human rights bodies in interpreting and amplifying rights protections in IHL through juridical or quasi-juridical interpretation and pronouncements. In armed conflicts, it is said, human rights apply concurrently and in ways that strengthen the protective constraints of IHL. Critics of the convergence thesis, on the other hand, have protested that pressing human rights obligations on state forces misunderstands the nature of both IHL and IHRL, and generates misplaced and impossibly onerous demands on belligerents—ultimately and perversely, the effect of emphasizing convergence may be less, not more, human rights protection.

12. Human rights and humanitarian law

2021 ◽  
pp. 165-177
Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Positive Dimension ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Legal Consequences

This chapter examines the nature and diversity of human rights, rather than any particular right. It looks at issues such as the universality, interdependence, and indivisibility of rights. It points to the issue of justiciability and emphasizes the obligation of States in both its negative, as well as its positive, dimension. The chapter examines the role of derogations and reservations to human rights treaties, as well as cardinal principles in such treaties, namely, the margin of appreciation and the scope of application. Finally, the chapter examines in some detail the key aspects and distinctions in international humanitarian law, such as the distinction and legal consequences between combatants and civilians and others.

12. Human rights and international humanitarian law

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Key Aspects

This chapter examines the nature and diversity of human rights, rather than any particular right. It looks at issues such as the universality, inter-dependence, and indivisibility of rights. It points to the issue of justiciability and emphasizes the obligation of States in both its negative as well as its positive dimension. The chapter examines the role of derogations and reservations to human rights treaties as well as cardinal principles in such treaties, namely the margin of appreciation and the scope of application. The chapter examines briefly regional human rights institutions, particularly the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the African system, in addition to the UN Charter and treaty-based bodies with an emphasis on the universal periodic review. Finally, the chapter examines in some detail the key aspects and distinctions in international humanitarian law, such as the distinction and legal consequences between combatants and civilians and others.

Spotlight on violations of international humanitarian law: The role of the media

1998 ◽  
Vol 38 (325) ◽  
pp. 619-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy W. Gutman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Media ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
Self Examination

Fifty years after the United Nations proclaimed its ambitious Universal Declaration of Human Rights, skeptics will have no trouble demonstrating that the international community's commitment to the document is shallow at best. The pretense was laid bare by the UN's inadequacy to stop genocide in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda, compounded by the institution's failure to conduct a thoroughgoing self-examination to determine the lessons of the debacle in Bosnia.

Using African Truth and Reconciliation Commission documentation for truth telling and reconciliation

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Proscovia Svärd
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation Commission ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Truth Telling ◽  
Reconciliation Commission ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Truth And Reconciliation Commissions ◽  
Reconciliation Process

Truth and Reconciliation Commissions (TRCs) are established to document violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in post-conflict societies. The intent is to excavate the truth to avoid political speculations and create an understanding of the nature of the conflict. The documentation hence results in a common narrative which aims to facilitate reconciliation to avoid regression to conflict. TRCs therefore do a tremendous job and create compound documentation that includes written statements, interviews, live public testimonies of witnesses and they also publish final reports based on the accumulated materials. At the end of their mission, TRCs recommend the optimal use of their documentation since it is of paramount importance to the reconciliation process. Despite this ambition, the TRCs’ documentation is often politicized and out of reach for the victims and the post-conflict societies at large. The TRCs’ documentation is instead poorly diffused into the post conflict societies and their findings are not effectively disseminated and used.

Conceptions And Interpretations of Human Rights in Europe and Asia: Normative Aspects

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-135
Author(s):  
Bożena Drzewicka
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The West ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The World ◽  
International Human

Conceptions And Interpretations of Human Rights in Europe and Asia: Normative AspectsThe issue of confronting values between civilizations has become very important. It influences not only the level of international politics but also the international normative activity. It is very interesting for the modern international law and its doctrine. The most important factor of causing huge changes in the system of international law is still the international human rights protection and the international humanitarian law which is related to it. It is very difficult to create one catalogue of executive instruments and procedures but it is possible to influence the attitude toward the basic paradigms. The frictions appear from time to time and move to other planes. The West and Asia are still antagonists in the dialogue on the future of the world. The article is a contribution to the intercivilizational dialogue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document