scholarly journals Double Standards in Peacekeeping? Subcontracting Peacekeeping and International Humanitarian Law

1999 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 753-757 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marten Zwanenburg
Keyword(s):  
Sierra Leone ◽  
Command And Control ◽  
Limited Attention ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Peace Enforcement ◽  
And Control

Increasingly the UN is ‘subcontracting’ peacekeeping and peace enforcement operations. The ECOMOG intervention in Sierra Leone is an example. Some members of ECOMOG have been accused of violating international humanitarian law. These accusations have not been adequately addressed by ECOMOG nor by the UN. The limited attention paid to this problem by the UN in ‘subcontracted’ operations contrasts with increased concern with respect for international humanitarian law by forces under UN command and control. It is argued that the UN should ensure that ‘subcontracting’ does not lead to lowering standards of international humanitarian law.

Double standards in US warfare: exploring the historical legacy of civilian protection and the complex nature of the moral-legal nexus

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 651-674 ◽  
Author(s):  
SEBASTIAN KAEMPF
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Specific Reference ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Historical Legacy ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Civilian Protection

AbstractThis article investigates how – by breaking with the historical double standards regarding civilian protection in conflicts – by the end of the twentieth century, US warfare has come to comply with International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Yet, civilians are still being killed. This has sparked controversies over what constitutes legitimate targeting practices and as to whether higher levels of civilian protection could be achieved. Through an engagement with these debates, including an exploration of the evolution of the norm of non-combatant immunity with specific reference to US warfare, the article argues that IHL does not provide fully satisfactory answers to these issues as it is too permissive in relation to the killing of civilians. The article proposes that more stringent moral guidelines, such as those underpinning the idea of ‘due care’, have the potential to go much further in providing protection for the innocent in war.

International Humanitarian Law, War Criminality and Child Recruitment: The Special Court for Sierra Leone's Decision in Prosecutor v. Samuel Hinga Norman

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-297 ◽  
Author(s):  
MATTHEW HAPPOLD
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Sierra Leone ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Appeal Chamber ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Status ◽  
Insight Into

The recent decision of the Appeals Chamber of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in Prosecutor v. Samuel Hinga Norman not only addresses the status of child recruitment as a war crime, but also provides an insight into how international criminal tribunals determine what conduct is criminal in international law. However, the authority of the decision is weakened by the unconvincing evidence relied upon by the Appeal Chamber in coming to its conclusions and by a strong dissent from Justice Robertson. The decision's faults, however, merely reflect problems in the process whereby violations of international humanitarian law are criminalized.

scholarly journals National Implementation of International Humanitarian Law

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
General Public ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
German Armed Forces ◽  
National Implementation ◽  
The Status ◽  
And Control

This report aims to compile information about relevant measures employed in the implementation of IHL in Germany, without being exhaustive. It therefore addresses the status of IHL in the German legal system, the status and control of the German armed forces as well as measures concerning, inter alia, the protection of civilians and civilian property, and the dissemination and enforcement of IHL. The report will appeal to anyone with an interest in IHL, including government officials, parliamentarians, the staff of non-governmental organisations, academics, journalists and the general public both in and outside Germany.

Protection of Peacekeepers Resorting to Armed Force – A Current Dilemma

2019 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 403-435
Author(s):  
Sophie Papadileris
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Active Involvement ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Legal Limits ◽  
Military Conflicts ◽  
Peace Enforcement ◽  
The One ◽  
A Current

The protection of peacekeepers and their classification in the categories of international humanitarian law has been a matter of controversy for years. To give peacekeepers some protection, the Safety Convention was established in 1994 and specific protection regulations were included in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1998. Nevertheless, neither attacks on peacekeepers nor their (active) involvement in military conflicts have decreased. Therefore, a highly topical dilemma currently occupies the legal department of the United Nations. There are various tasks of peacekeeping operations that are difficult to reconcile. On the one hand, peacekeeping is traditionally achieved through a simple presence in which peacekeepers are not involved in combat operations and are protected as civilians. On the other hand, where peace enforcement involves military coercive means, it may be difficult not to regard the personnel as combatants. The boundaries between these types of mission are fluid. Due to increasingly robust peacekeeping mandates, the question of protection and its legal limits, with regard to possible participation in hostilities, is more acute than ever. Keywords: Peacekeeping Operations, Protection, Safety Convention, Article 8 ICC Statute, Direct Participation in Hostilities, Aggressive Mandate, Self-Defence, Cruz Report

scholarly journals Taking Armed Groups Seriously: Ways to Improve their Compliance with International Humanitarian Law

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Sassòli
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Sense Of Ownership ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
The Law ◽  
And Control ◽  
International Character ◽  
Monitor And Control

AbstractMost contemporary armed conflicts are not of an international character. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) applicable to these conflicts is equally binding on non-State armed groups as it is on States. The legal mechanisms for its implementation are, however, still mainly geared toward States. The author considers that the perspective of such groups and the difficulties for them in applying IHL should be taken into account in order to make the law more realistic and more often respected. It is submitted that the law is currently often developed and interpreted without taking into account the realities of armed groups. This contribution explores how armed groups could be involved in the development, interpretation and operationalization of the law. It argues that armed groups should be allowed to accept IHL formally, to create – amongst other things – a certain sense of ownership. Their respect of the law should also be rewarded. Possible methods to encourage, monitor and control respect of IHL by armed groups are described. The author suggests in particular that armed groups should be allowed and encouraged to report on their implementation of IHL to an existing or newly created institution. Finally, in case of violations, this contribution proposes ways to apply criminal, civil and international responsibility, including sanctions, to non-State armed groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document