Reply to Professor Waldron

2020 ◽  
pp. 258-269
Author(s):  
Tamar Meisels
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
The Right

The volume concludes with an exchange between the authors, directly engaging with the others’ respective argument. In this penultimate chapter, Meisels briefly responds and replies to the arguments raised by Waldron against targeted killing. Meisels emphasizes some points of agreement between the two authors: Their commitment to the right to life and the laws of armed conflicts, and their non-pacifist and non-absolutist position on targeted killing. She reemphasizes their points of disagreement, such as the authors’ very different use of analogies, particularly in determining the normative framework for discussing targeted killing (war/armed conflict), their differing views on possible proliferation of target killing, as well as disagreements over precedents and particular cases.

scholarly journals The Right to Life in Armed Conflict

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Park
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

The controversy surrounding the applicability of the right to life during armed conflict makes it arguably one of the most divisive and topical issues at the junction of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Recent litigation has, among other things, prompted the UK government to signal an intention to derogate from Article 2, ECHR, subject to certain caveats, in future armed conflicts. The litigation pursuant to Article 2 is also set to continue as the UK, and many other States with right to life obligations, will continue to use lethal force overseas; thus the significance of the issue will remain unabated. The scope and application of the right to life in armed conflict not only concerns parties to the ECHR; the predominance of coalition military operations in recent years has necessitated that it is essential for all troop-contributing States to understand the legal limitations of those States bound by the ECHR. It is equally important that the UN, NATO, NGOs, and other governments not directly involved in the armed conflict are aware of any States’ right to life obligations. Notwithstanding this, the applicability of the right to life in armed conflict is yet to be fully considered in academic literature. This book aims to close this lacuna and address the issue of the right to life in armed conflict by identifying and analysing the applicable law, citing recent examples of State practice, and offering concrete proposals to ensure that States comply with their right to life obligations.

The right to life in armed conflict: does international humanitarian law provide all the answers?

2006 ◽  
Vol 88 (864) ◽  
pp. 881-904 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Doswald-Beck
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Use Of Force ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

AbstractThis article describes the relevant interpretation of the right to life by human rights treaty bodies and analyses how this might influence the law relating to the use of force in armed conflicts and occupations where international humanitarian law is unclear. The concurrent applicability of international humanitarian law and human rights law to hostilities in armed conflict does not mean that the right to life must, in all situations, be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of international humanitarian law. The author submits that the human rights law relating to the right to life is suitable to supplement the rules of international humanitarian law relating to the use of force for non-international conflicts and occupation, as well as the law relating to civilians taking a “direct part in hostilities”. Finally, by making reference to the traditional prohibition of assassination, the author concludes that the application of human rights law in these situations would not undermine the spirit of international humanitarian law.

The Duty to Investigate Violations of the Right to Life in Armed Conflicts in the Jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-191
Author(s):  
Giovanna Maria Frisso
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
State Compliance ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

This article explores how the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (the Court) has dealt with allegations of violations of the right to life during an armed conflict and, in particular, how it has dealt with allegations of violation of the obligation to investigate such allegations. The article notes that international humanitarian law (IHL) was initially used by the Court to strengthen the general obligations of states to protect the rights guaranteed by the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR). Later IHL began informing the interpretation of specific rights. This change has been more significant in relation to the interpretation of the right to life under the ACHR than in the examination of state compliance with the right of access to justice, which encompasses the duty to investigate allegations of violations of the right to life during an armed conflict. The analysis of the Court's jurisprudence demonstrates that the different ways in which the Court has addressed the relationship between IHL and international human rights law (IHRL) have been informed by its primary effort to ensure that the interpretation of the ACHR provides the widest protection possible to individual rights.

Substantive Right to Life Obligations

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Park
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Military Operation ◽  
General Terms ◽  
The Right

There is a difference between a State’s substantive and procedural right to life obligations. This chapter explores what amount to a state’s substantive right to life obligations with reference to Article 2, ECHR and Article 6, ICCPR. The respective provisions are analysed to determine the extent of a state’s substantive right to life obligations during armed conflict and then a comparison between the two international law instruments is undertaken. In order to undertake such a comparison, the exceptions to the right to life in both the ECHR and ICCPR are examined. Once determined, the planning and conduct of a military operation are considered, to assess the extent to which, in general terms, right to life obligations are considered in these areas.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Park
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Right To Life

The introduction sets out the broad questions to be addressed, namely: do states have right to life obligations during armed conflict; if so, what are these obligations; when do they apply, and in respect of whom; and how can states best ensure compliance with these obligations? The introduction also provides a précis of each chapter and the themes explored therein. Additionally, it makes reference to the fact that UK armed forces doctrine and procedures in respect of recent armed conflicts will be used as examples to explore the issues under consideration in the book. The aim is also to proffer a view on where the current UK procedures do not comply with the state’s right to life obligations and how this can be rectified.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kubo Mačák
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Comprehensive Examination

This chapter introduces the central aim of this book: to provide a comprehensive examination of the notion, process, and effects of internationalization of armed conflicts in international law. It presents a brief research overview, outlining the scope of the enquiry, the research methodology, and the structure of the book. It then lays out the conceptual and normative framework for the rest of the book. To that end, it first justifies the need for the present study by confirming the continuing distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts in international law. Then, it puts forward a conception of internationalization that expresses the legal transformation from a non-international to an international armed conflict.

scholarly journals La Réparation Individuelle en Application des Mécanismes Prévus par le Droit International Humanitaire

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 431
Author(s):  
Sophie Rondeau
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Present State ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Droit International ◽  
The Right ◽  
Droit International Humanitaire

Le présent article fait état d’un questionnement sur l’état actuel du rôle des normes juridiques émanant du système de droit international humanitaire (DIH) en ce qui a trait au droit à la réparation, en prenant soin de mettre la personne en tant que victime de la guerre au centre de notre réflexion. En considérant la notion de réparation sous l’angle de la victime comme un tout à décrire et à analyser, nous cherchons à savoir s’il existe un droit à la réparation que possède la victime d’un conflit armé régi par le droit international humanitaire. Le fondement même de cette recherche s’appuie donc sur le cadre normatif conventionnel du DIH régissant la notion de réparation, que cette dernière accorde ou non un droit à une victime.This paper presents a series of questions on the present state of the role of judicial standards arising from the system of international humanitarian law [IHL] as regards the right to compensation, by making it a point to place the person as a war victim at the center of our reflection. In considering the concept of compensation from the angle of the victim as a whole, we seek to know whether there exists a right to compensation to which the victim of an armed conflict governed by international humanitarian law is entitled. The very foundation of this research is thus based on the conventional normative framework of IHL governing the concept of compensation, whether or not it grants a right to a victim.

Protecting the Environment from the Perspective of the Law of Armed Conflict

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 252-260
Author(s):  
Bartłomiej Krzan
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law

Abstract The present study analyses climate change from the perspective of the law of armed conflict. Climate may be both a victim and a means of warfare. Arguably, the existing normative framework is broad enough to allow for accommodating climate change. It cannot be denied that the environment is easily harmed, or at least jeopardized in times of armed conflicts. Despite the obvious lack of explicit references in the instruments of international humanitarian law, it may be argued that it is possible to fit climate change in. The accompanying analysis addresses the respective potential and the ensuing hurdles.

The Right to Life and the International Law Framework Regulating the Use of Armed Drones

2020 ◽  
pp. 153-189
Author(s):  
Christof Heyns ◽  
Dapo Akande ◽  
Lawrence Hill-Cawthorne ◽  
Thompson Chengeta
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
Drone Strikes ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
The Right

This chapter provides a holistic examination of the international legal frameworks which regulate targeted killings by drones. It argues that for a particular drone strike to be lawful, it must satisfy the legal requirements under all applicable international legal regimes. It is argued that the legality of a drone strike under the jus ad bellum does not preclude the wrongfulness of that strike under international humanitarian law or international human rights law. The chapter then considers the important legal challenges that the use of armed drones poses under each of the three legal frameworks mentioned above. It considers the application of the right to life in armed conflict, particularly in territory not controlled by the state conducting the strike. The chapter then turns to some of the key controversies in the application of international humanitarian law to drone strikes, such as the possibility of a global non-international armed conflict and the question of who may be targeted in a non-international armed conflict. The final substantive section considers the law relating to the use of force by states against non-state groups abroad.

18 The Law of Neutrality

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bothe Michael
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
The Other ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Neutral State ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter focuses on rules of the law of neutrality concerning the protection of the victims of armed conflicts, which must be considered as part of international humanitarian law. ‘Neutrality’ describes the particular status, as defined by international law, of a state not party to an armed conflict. This status entails specific rights and duties in the relationship between the neutral and the belligerent states. On one hand, there is the right of the neutral state to remain apart from, and not to be adversely affected by, the conflict. On the other hand, there is the duty of non-participation and impartiality. The right not to be adversely affected means that the relationship between the neutral and belligerent States is governed by the law of peace, which is modified only in certain respects by the law of neutrality. In particular, the neutral State must tolerate certain controls in the area of maritime commerce. The duty of non-participation means, above all, that the state must abstain from supporting a party to the conflict. This duty not to support also means that the neutral state is under a duty not to allow one party to the conflict to use the resources of the neutral state against the will of the opponent.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document