International Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law

2019 ◽  
pp. 141-169 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzannah Linton
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
External Threats ◽  
Regional Trends

This chapter assesses the approaches of Asia-Pacific states to international humanitarian law (IHL) and international criminal law (ICL), within the context of the international legal framework. It first addresses influential approaches in the region, including how states present themselves in relation to IHL and ICL issues. Next, it considers how regional states engage with the issue of responsibility in international law, with an emphasis on IHL and ICL. The chapter then examines acceptance of these two bodies of law, arguing that there is no hostility to the basic norms of IHL, but a more unsettled approach to ICL. There is a definite chill in respect of aspects that potentially encroach on independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, or that smack of Western neo-colonialism. These are of course subjectively evaluated by each state. In practical terms, this frostiness can be seen in the responses to external threats of accountability against political leaders, the exercise of universal jurisdiction, Security Council referrals to the International Criminal Court, Pillar Three of the R2P doctrine, the crime of aggression, and certain formulations of other international crimes (for example, war crimes in non-international armed conflict). However, even within these broad regional trends, there is no uniformity. There is decidedly no collective ‘Asia-Pacific approach’ that emerges from the present chapter.

Sources of International Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphaël van Steenberghe
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
The Impact

This chapter analyses the specific features which characterize the sources of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international criminal law (ICL). It first examines those which are claimed to characterize IHL and ICL sources in relation to the secondary norms regulating the classical sources of international law. The chapter then looks at the specific features of some IHL and ICL sources in relation to the others of the same field. Attention is given particularly to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the impact of its features on other ICL sources, as well as to the commitments made by armed groups, whose characteristics make them difficult to classify under any of the classical sources of international law. In general, this chapter shows how all those specific features derive from the specific fundamental principles and evolving concerns of these two fields of international law.

The Criminalization of War Crimes in Italy and the Shortcomings of the Domestic Legal Framework

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 679-697
Author(s):  
Giulio Bartolini
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Operations

Abstract The Italian domestic legal framework related to war crimes is characterised by several shortcomings. It is still largely centred on the provisions present in the 1941 wartime military criminal code, which have not been subjected to substantial legal restyling, regardless of the explicit and implicit obligations of domestic criminalization inferred from treaties ratified by Italy. Only in 2001–2002, at the time of Italian military operations in Afghanistan, were certain amendments to this code introduced, in order to partly adapt its content to current rules of international humanitarian law and international criminal law. However, such solutions have not brought about effective harmonization and were drafted within an incoherent legal framework, made even more complex by subsequent reforms addressing military missions abroad, thus resulting in the current unsatisfactory scenario which would require substantive reforms.

scholarly journals Means and methods of combat - differing parameters and requirements of military necessity in international humanitarian law and international criminal law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
James Gallagher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Military Necessity

<p>The concept of military necessity is of fundamental importance for International Humanitarian Law (IHL), International Criminal Law (ICL) and International Law, generally. States and individuals have used military necessity as a justification when extraordinary situations “require the adoption of measures departing from the normally applicable law in order to protect basic values and fundamental interests.”1 Measures adopted on the grounds of necessity have been accepted at international law by international courts and tribunals, state practice, and international legal doctrine. This paper will analyse and explain the origins of military necessity under IHL, and how military necessity’s use has developed and influenced the behaviour of actors at international law, primarily during times of armed conflict. Furthermore, this paper will seek to establish the role that military necessity plays at ICL. This will be done by analysing various case law examples of international tribunals where the tribunals have been asked to determine whether military necessity constituted a legitimate justification for a particular course of action taken by an individual, primarily in positions of command. This paper will highlight the circumstances where a legitimate finding of military necessity existed, and will contrast this to occasion where actions did not meet the required threshold. It will also seek to determine how military necessity is interpreted and understood by various international organisations such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), the United Nations (UN), and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The paper will begin with by providing an overview of the origins of military necessity under IHL and how it has evolved in its interpretation and usage by authors writing on military necessity, and states seeking to utilise it.</p>

scholarly journals Means and methods of combat - differing parameters and requirements of military necessity in international humanitarian law and international criminal law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
James Gallagher
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Military Necessity

<p>The concept of military necessity is of fundamental importance for International Humanitarian Law (IHL), International Criminal Law (ICL) and International Law, generally. States and individuals have used military necessity as a justification when extraordinary situations “require the adoption of measures departing from the normally applicable law in order to protect basic values and fundamental interests.”1 Measures adopted on the grounds of necessity have been accepted at international law by international courts and tribunals, state practice, and international legal doctrine. This paper will analyse and explain the origins of military necessity under IHL, and how military necessity’s use has developed and influenced the behaviour of actors at international law, primarily during times of armed conflict. Furthermore, this paper will seek to establish the role that military necessity plays at ICL. This will be done by analysing various case law examples of international tribunals where the tribunals have been asked to determine whether military necessity constituted a legitimate justification for a particular course of action taken by an individual, primarily in positions of command. This paper will highlight the circumstances where a legitimate finding of military necessity existed, and will contrast this to occasion where actions did not meet the required threshold. It will also seek to determine how military necessity is interpreted and understood by various international organisations such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), the United Nations (UN), and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The paper will begin with by providing an overview of the origins of military necessity under IHL and how it has evolved in its interpretation and usage by authors writing on military necessity, and states seeking to utilise it.</p>

A Commander’s Motivations and Geographical Remoteness under Command Responsibility: An Analysis of Controversial Issues of the Bemba Appeal Judgment

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Matteo Colorio
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Crime Scene ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Controversial Issues ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Principle Of Legality

Abstract The Bemba Appeal Judgment undermines confident prospects that the International Criminal Court could make a greater use of charges alleging command responsibility. This judgment introduces serious uncertainties in the law on command responsibility, in particular by reflecting long-lasting disputes concerning this doctrine on the ‘all necessary and reasonable measures’ element under Article 28 of the Rome Statute. The Bemba Appeal Judgment, indeed, includes a controversial evaluation of the relevance of a commander’s motivations in taking measures and of her geographical remoteness from the crime scene. This Article analyses these issues through the lenses of International Humanitarian Law and of fundamental principles of International Criminal Law, in particular the principle of legality and the principle of individual culpability.

scholarly journals Self-Referring to the International Criminal Court: A Continuation of War by Other Means

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 109 ◽  
pp. 260-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Parvathi Menon
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Sub Saharan ◽  
Internal Armed Conflicts

Weak sub-Saharan African states use international law and its institutions to legitimate their actions and delegitimate their internal enemies. In this essay, I argue that during internal armed conflicts, African states use international criminal law to redefine the conflict as international and thereby rebrand domestic political opponents as international criminals/enemies who are a threat to the entire community. This in turn sets the stage for invoking belligerent privileges under international humanitarian law (IHL).

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document