Observance of international humanitarian law by forces under the command of the European Union

2013 ◽  
Vol 95 (891-892) ◽  
pp. 637-643
Author(s):  
Frederik Naert

AbstractIn this contribution, I will identify the main issues relevant for the applicability and application of international humanitarian law (IHL) in military operations under the command of the European Union (EU) and I will briefly describe the EU's practice and policy in this respect.1

2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (01) ◽  
pp. 168-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valentina Falco

When exploring the sources of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) obligations of multinational peacekeeping forces, legal scholars have thus far focused mainly on the UN (and, to a lesser extent, NATO), whilst other organizations have remained largely in the shadows. Whereas the UN Secretary-General's Bulletin on the Observance by UN Forces of International Humanitarian Law has been widely debated and extensively investigated, little or no attention has been paid to self-regulatory solutions adopted by other international and regional organizations.This Article focuses on the European Union (EU), holding that this regional organization—by virtue of its sui generis nature and of its increasing engagement in the field of crisis management—can be regarded as one of the most interesting newcomers to the realm of jus in bello. More specifically, it looks at the EU's internal legal order with a view to verifying whether and to what extent it may complement customary IHL in regulating the conduct of the EU as a military actor. The Article surveys the primary and secondary sources of EU legislation which may prima facie spell out obligations for the EU-led troops engaged in European Security and Defence Policy military operations. Finally, the Article seeks to draw some broader conclusions on the nature of the relationship between EU law and IHL, as well as on the complementarity and inherent normative value of their sources.


2021 ◽  
Vol 191 ◽  
pp. 402-442

Economics, trade and finance — Food imports — Import of foodstuffs originating from East Jerusalem, West Bank and Golan Heights into the European Union — Labelling of products — Whether products originating from Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories must be labelled as such — Observance of international law — Whether foodstuffs coming from settlements established in breach of rules of international humanitarian law — Ethical considerations — Purchasing decisions of consumers — Misleading of consumers Relationship of international law and municipal law — European Union law — Treaty on European Union, 1992 — Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, 2007 — EU Customs Code — Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 — Consistent interpretation of EU law — Interpreting Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 in manner consistent with international law — Notions of “State”, “territory” and “place of provenance” — Referral of questions by national court to Court of Justice of European Union Territory — Status — Occupation — Occupied Territories in which State of Israel Occupying Power — East Jerusalem, West Bank and Golan Heights — Rules of international humanitarian law — Israel having limited jurisdiction — Israeli settlements in Occupied Territories — Palestinian people of West Bank enjoying right to self-determination — Golan Heights part of territory of Syrian Arab Republic — Import of foodstuffs into European Union — Labelling of products — Whether products originating from Israeli settlements in Occupied Territories must be labelled as such — Observance of international law — Whether foodstuffs coming from settlements established in breach of rules of international humanitarian law — Ethical considerations — Purchasing decisions of consumers — Misleading of consumers War and armed conflict — International humanitarian law — Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 1949 — Article 49 — Obligation of States not to “deport or transfer part of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies” — Impact on labelling of products originating in Occupied Territories — Status of East Jerusalem, West Bank and Golan Heights as Occupied Territories — Whether products originating from Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories must be labelled as such — The law of the European Union


2009 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pål Wrange

AbstractIn 2005, the European Union (EU) adopted Guidelines on Promoting Compliance with International Humanitarian Law(IHL). The Guidelines are designed to be implemented by any officer in the foreign services of the EU, including its member states. After outlining the main features of IHL, the Guidelines have provisions on the decision-making process and on possible action to take. The Guidelines, which have been quite widely implemented according toa survey, should be an important tool in keeping IHL issues on the EU's agenda.


2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 381-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Breslin

The European Union as a prominent regional organization is increasingly expected to contribute positively in terms of the promotion of certain values, both by European Union citizens and by the international community. These values include the promotion and development of international law, including international humanitarian law. The focus of this Article is on the influence, actual and potential, of the European Union in terms of promoting humanitarian law externally, and on ensuring respect of humanitarian law by third States. It briefly discusses the evolution of the duty to ensure respect and outlines the relevance of international humanitarian law to the external action of the European Union. The European Union Guidelines on Promoting Compliance with International Humanitarian Law are introduced and the background, content, and potential are explored. While not constituting binding law, these guidelines represent the position of the European Union in relation to promoting humanitarian law externally and reflect the responsibilities of European Union Member States with regard to ensuring respect for humanitarian law.


Author(s):  
Simon McKenzie ◽  
Eve Massingham

Abstract The obligations of international humanitarian law are not limited to the attacker; the defender is also required to take steps to protect civilians from harm. The requirement to take precautions against the effects of attack requires the defender to minimize the risk that civilians and civilian objects will be harmed by enemy military operations. At its most basic, it obliges defenders to locate military installations away from civilians. Furthermore, where appropriate, the status of objects should be clearly marked. It is – somewhat counterintuitively – about making it easier for the attacker to select lawful targets by making visible the distinction between civilian objects and military objectives. The increasing importance of digital infrastructure to modern life may make complying with these precautionary obligations more complicated. Maintaining separation between military and civilian networks is challenging as both operate using at least some of the same infrastructure, relying on the same cables, systems, and electromagnetic spectrum. In addition, the speed at which operations against digital infrastructure can occur increases the difficulty of complying with the obligation – particularly if such operations involve a degree of automation or the use of artificial intelligence (ai). This paper sets out the source and extent of the obligation to take precautions against hostile military operations and considers how they might apply to digital infrastructure. As well as clarifying the extent of the obligation, it applies the obligation to take precautions against hostile military operations to digital infrastructure, giving examples of where systems designers are taking these obligations into account, and other examples of where they must.


2015 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kubo Mačák

This article presents the case for a progressive interpretation of the notion of military objectives in international humanitarian law (IHL), bringing computer data within the scope of this concept. The advent of cyber military operations has presented a dilemma as to the proper understanding of data in IHL. The emerging orthodoxy, represented by the 2013Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare, advances the argument that the intangible nature of data renders it ineligible to be an object for the purposes of the rules on targeting in IHL. This article, on the contrary, argues that because of its susceptibility to alteration and destruction, the better view is that data is an object within the meaning of this term under IHL and thus it may qualify as a military objective. The article supports this conclusion by means of a textual, systematic and teleological interpretation of the definition of military objectives found in treaty and customary law. The upshot of the analysis presented here is that data that does not meet the criteria for qualification as a military objective must be considered a civilian object, with profound implications for the protection of civilian datasets in times of armed conflict.


2019 ◽  
pp. 279-302
Author(s):  
Anders Henriksen

This chapter examines those parts of international law that regulate how military operations must be conducted—jus in bello. It begins in Section 14.2 with an overview of the most important legal sources. Section 14.3 discusses when humanitarian law applies and Section 14.4 examines the issue of battlefield status and the distinction between combatants and civilians. Section 14.5 provides an overview of some of the most basic principles governing the conduct of hostilities while Section 14.6 concerns belligerent occupation and Section 14.7. deals with the regulation of non-international armed conflict. Finally, Section 14.8 explores the relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights law in times of armed conflict.


Author(s):  
Anders Henriksen

This chapter examines those parts of international law that regulate how military operations must be conducted — jus in bello. It begins in Section 14.2 with an overview of the most important legal sources. Section 14.3 discusses when humanitarian law applies. Section 14.4 examines the issue of battlefield status and the distinction between combatants and civilians. Section 14.5 provides an overview of some of the most basic principles governing the conduct of hostilities while Section 14.6 deals with the issue of regulation of non-international armed conflict. Finally, Section 14.7 explores the relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights law in times of armed conflict.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document