Western Gunrunners, (Middle-)Eastern Casualties: Unlawfully Trading Arms with States Engulfed in Yemeni Civil War?

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Ferro
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Arms Transfers ◽  
Military Equipment ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Uk

Abstract According to the United Nations Secretary-General, Yemen today constitutes the worst man-made humanitarian crisis in the world. It is fuelled by extensive third-state involvement, with none of the warring parties championing respect for international human rights and humanitarian law (to put it mildly). Conversely, primary rules of international law already prohibit arms transfers from the moment there is a significant risk that they could be used to commit or facilitate grave breaches, with the recipient’s past and present record of respect for international law qualifying as the crucial factor to predict future transgressions. From that perspective, it appears deeply disingenuous for western states to continue transferring military equipment to members of the multilateral coalition in Yemen while maintaining adherence to the international legal framework. This article thus aims to examine whether the legal framework lives up to its noble goals or rather serves to defend state decisions that primarily serve their economic interests. It is structured as follows: Section 1 starts with an overview of the facts, and the focus and aim of this article. Section 2 then sets out the international legal framework as it applies to the trade in conventional arms with states that are involved in a non-international armed conflict. Section 3 analyses key domestic judgments (in the UK, Canada, Belgium and France) to test the available facts against the legal framework as elaborated. Finally, Section 4 concludes.

scholarly journals ‘Not dead but sleeping’: Expanding international law to better regulate the diverse effects of ceasefire agreements

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 731-743
Author(s):  
Marika Sosnowski
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Development Studies ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Economic Networks ◽  
Citizenship Rights ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Governance Institutions ◽  
New Research

AbstractCeasefire agreements are legally governed by international humanitarian law because they have generally been considered in relation to how they affect levels of violence. However, new research in the fields of anthropology, security, and development studies suggests that ceasefires can have many more ramifications. These range from their ability to influence governance institutions, property and citizenship rights, economic networks, and security mechanisms. Consequently, this article suggests that a broader legal framework is needed through which to consider ceasefires and their consequences. While canvassing the option of ceasefires being types of contractual documents or as special agreements under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the article concludes that the best way to regulate ceasefire agreements is through an expanded version of lex pacificatoria. Rather than being governed by hard international law, such a move would allow for the implementation of more flexible programmatic standards to influence the myriad ways ceasefires are negotiated, the conduct of belligerents, and their diverse effects on the ground during wartime.

Why the Prohibition of Enforced Disappearance Has Attained Jus Cogens Status in International Law

2012 ◽  
Vol 81 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Convention ◽  
Historical Developments ◽  
Jus Cogens

This article examines the question whether jus cogens includes the prohibition of enforced disappearances, and why this is important. It surveys the meaning, context, development, status and position of jus cogens as well as enforced disappearance in international law, including their relationship to each other. It surveys the status of enforced disappearance in international law in general, as well as in international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law. The article scans the historical developments of international law, including developments over the last few decades, to indicate that the prohibition against enforced disappearance has attained jus cogens status. The legal framework is examined, including the jurisprudence that has emanated from a variety of sources. Specific treaties that deal with enforced disappearance are reviewed including the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICED). What jus cogens is, what the controversies are that surround it, the different ways that it is understood within different schools of thought, and how these issues impact on whether the prohibition of enforced disappearance has attained jus cogens status are studied. The historical developments around enforced disappearances are examined in some detail to determine what its status is, particularly in relation to state practice, so as to determine whether it is jus cogens.

1 History and Sources

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henckaerts Jean-Marie
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
Rules And Principles ◽  
International Conventions ◽  
The Military

This introductory chapter provides an overview of international humanitarian law (IHL), which is also known as the international law of armed conflict, or simply law of armed conflict (LOAC) or law of war. The rules and principles of IHL seek to limit the effects of armed conflict and at its core, IHL aims to preserve a sense of humanity in time of war. At the same time, IHL has been developed to regulate the social reality that is armed conflict. As such, in order to provide a realistic, and hence useful, legal framework, IHL must also take into account the military needs of parties to an armed conflict in their pursuit of defeating the adversary. The development of particular treaties and specific rules of IHL over time reflects the exercise of finding the correct balance between these humanitarian and military considerations. As a branch of international law, IHL is subject to the general rules of international law, such as those related to sources, treaty interpretation, and state responsibility. The sources of international law are set out in article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice. This provision lists international conventions, international custom, and general principles of law as the main sources of international law in accordance with which the Court is to decide disputes submitted to it.

scholarly journals Copyright

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (03) ◽  
pp. 162-164
Author(s):  
P Smart
Keyword(s):  
Digital Technology ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Film Music ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Copyright Transfer ◽  
Right To Copy ◽  
The Moment ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

‘Talent is always conscious of its own abundance, and does not object to sharing.’ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The First Circle When authors submit an article for publication, most publishers will ask for a signature from the author on a copyright form. The relationship between an author and the publisher is then a partnership but one that many authors are reluctant to enter into. After all, why should a publisher take copyright from an author of an article when the author had the idea and has done all the hard work for the content of the article? In response to this question, publishers will generally claim that copyright transfer agreements protect authors from copyright infringements such as plagiarism, libel and unauthorised uses as well as protecting the integrity of the article. Copyright in the UK was originally concerned with preventing the unlawful copying of printed material in the 17th century in response to the then new technology of book printing. The first copyright act in the UK, the Statute of Anne in 1710, was subtitled ‘An Act for the Encouragement of Learning’, and granted privileges and monopolies to book printers. Since then, copyright law has evolved to incorporate many forms of communication, including photography, film, music, computers, engraving, designs on t-shirts and digital technology among other forms of media. The most recent act in the UK is the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. While copyright covers an author’s right to copy, distribute and revise the work, it does not protect ideas – just their fixation or expression. The moment that an idea is fixed or expressed physically, copyright starts and does not have to be registered. In this article, Pippa Smart provides an overview of the legal framework that protects authors and publishers. Jyoti Shah, Commissioning Editor

The Counterterrorism War Paradigm versus International Humanitarian Law: The Legal Contradictions and Global Consequences of the US “War on Terror”

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (04) ◽  
pp. 922-956
Author(s):  
Lisa Hajjar
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
War On Terror ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Strategic Objectives ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Government

Since 2001, we have witnessed the development of a counterterrorism war paradigm built to advance claims about the post-9/11 scope and discretion of US executive power and to articulate specific interpretations of national security interests and strategic objectives in the “war on terror.” What makes this a paradigm rather than merely a conglomeration of evolving policies is the cohesiveness and mutual reinforcement of its underlying rationales about the rights of the US government to prosecute a territorially unbounded war against an evolving cast of enemies. Drawing on Bourdieu’s concept of a juridical field, the article focuses on how officials who constructed a legal framework for this paradigm, rather than disregarding international law wholesale, have engaged in interpretations and crafted rationales to evade some international humanitarian law (IHL) rules and norms while rejecting the underlying logic or applicability of others. This article traces the counterterrorism war paradigm’s development and explains how it now competes with and threatens to supersede the customary law principles enshrined in IHL.

Conceptualising Disappearances in International Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 37-62
Author(s):  
Barbara A. Frey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Transitional Democracies ◽  
Legal Accountability ◽  
International Human

Enforced disappearance is one of the most serious crimes, prohibited across several regimes of international law, including human rights, humanitarian law and criminal law, yet Latin American governments and officials frequently avoid legal accountability for these violations. The dynamics of disappearances in post-transitional democracies call for a reconceptualisation of the international human rights framework, by reconsidering the meaning of state acquiescence. This chapter argues that a relevant and effective framework must embrace a contextual analysis and foreground the positive obligations of states to search and investigate these crimes, using generally accepted principles found in due diligence jurisprudence to measure the legal adequacy of the state’s responses to reported disappearances. Stretching the legal framework is necessary to disrupt the benefits of impunity, which violate the rights of victims, allow disappearances to thrive, and harm societies by hiding the truth.

From Complicity to Due Diligence: When Do States Incur Responsibility for Their Involvement in Serious International Wrongdoing?

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 667-707
Author(s):  
Anja Seibert-Fohr
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Norms ◽  
State Involvement ◽  
Ex Ante ◽  
Positive Knowledge

The article considers different modes of State involvement in serious violations of international law and the legal criteria for unlawful contributions. Giving special attention to participation below the level of complicity – when a State contributes to serious violations without possessing positive knowledge – the author considers primary rules of international law that prohibit indirect participation, such as the duty to respect and ensure fundamental human rights. The article argues in favour of a risk-based ex ante responsibility in order to prevent cooperation between States which violate fundamental legal norms of the international community. Accordingly, States incur responsibility for indirect participation if they do not exercise the necessary diligence to prevent such violations. Though due diligence is usually referred to when States fail to intervene in cases of third party abuse, it applies a fortiori in cases of active contributions. While the article concentrates on serious human rights violations, it also refers to other fields of international law, including breaches of international humanitarian law. By specifying the legal parameters of due diligence as a general principle it thus contributes to the scholarly debate on the content of due diligence in international law more generally.

Compromise or Commitment: Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Obligations for UN Peace Forces

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-245
Author(s):  
Marten Zwanenburg
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The One

Allegations of human rights and humanitarian law violations by UN forces have highlighted the need for more clarity in this area. This requires a focus on human rights and humanitarian norms applicable to UN forces, and the question of responsibility for violations of those norms. To a large extent, these questions concern the relations between the UN, national contingents, and troop contributing states. What are their respective rights and obligations? In this paper it is submitted that the answer given to this question under international law differs from the one given in the specific legal framework and practice of UN forces.

scholarly journals Triads in International Relations: The Effect of Superpower Aid, Trade, and Arms Transfers on Conflict in the Middle East

2014 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Mintz ◽  
Uk Heo
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Negative Binomial ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Negative Binomial Regression ◽  
Arms Transfers ◽  
Conflict Processes ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Triadic Relationship

AbstractIn this paper we extend dyadic research on conflict processes in international relations, to the analysis of triadic relationship. Specifically, we argue that although conflict can be explained at the dyadic level of analysis, a triadic analysis can greatly enrich our understanding of the dynamics of conflict and cooperation. We present a theory of triadic relationship and test it with data on the effect of aid and trade of Middle Eastern dyads with major powers (the US, The Soviet Union/Russia, the UK and France) in the post-WWII era using negative binomial regression. The results show the importance of expanding research in International Relations from dyadic to triadic interactions. Robustness tests demonstrate the validity of our analysis.

Protecting cultural property in Syria: New opportunities for States to enhance compliance with international law?

2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (906) ◽  
pp. 1037-1074 ◽  
Author(s):  
Polina Levina Mahnad
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
International Community ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Third Party ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Loss Of Life ◽  
Near Future ◽  
Political Settlement

AbstractThe war in Syria has lasted for six years and has led to massive destruction and loss of life. Stymieing international peace efforts from the outset, there is increasing doubt that the conflict will reach a resolution or political settlement in the near future. This frustration has triggered an appetite among States, civil society and the international community for finite and concrete measures that can contribute to greater protection and compliance with international law. A recent constellation of events around the protection of cultural property appears to herald a shift in the response of the international community toward prescribing practical and actionable measures for third-party States. Drawing on the responsibility of third States “to respect and ensure respect for” international humanitarian law, this article examines the legal framework protecting cultural property and recent innovative protection responses that contribute to ensuring compliance with international law in Syria, short of military assistance and intervention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document