Gaps in Corporate Liability

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 486-502
Author(s):  
Jelena Aparac

Abstract Fact-finding is a fundamental step in providing documentation that can be used in domestic and international proceedings. The United Nations establishes commissions of inquiry to investigate international law violations, often in contexts of armed conflict, under the mandate of the Human Rights Council or other more political organs of the UN. They vary in mandate, as well as in investigative and geographic scope. However, to this day, fact-finding mechanisms or inquiry commissions have only rarely conducted investigations into corporate crimes, even in cases where the UN has explicitly recognized the part played by economic actors in armed conflicts. Because corporations are not subjects of international law, they are presumed not to have any direct obligations under international law. Moreover, the mandates of fact-finding missions de facto exclude corporations from investigations because such mandates are always designed to investigate international law violations. By voluntarily dismissing any investigation of corporate crimes, the UN is significantly limiting prospects for corporate responsibility and impeding the process of transitional justice.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-27
Author(s):  
Olaitan Oluwaseyi Olusegun

Abstract Armed conflicts are characterised by violence and human rights violations with various implications on the citizens, economy and development of nations. The impact is however more pronounced with life-long consequences on children, the most vulnerable members of the society. This article examines the impact of non-international armed conflicts on children in Nigeria and identifies the laws for the protection of children against armed conflicts, both in international law and Nigeria’s domestic law. It also addresses the challenges involved in the protection of children in armed conflict situations in Nigeria. The study found that legal efforts to protect children have not been given sufficient attention in Nigeria. This is mostly due to various challenges including the fragmentation of legal framework and the refusal to domesticate relevant treaties. It is thus recommended that these challenges be addressed through the implementation of effective legal frameworks.


Author(s):  
Ipsen Knut

This chapter examines the regulation of combatant status in treaty law and the many challenges for combatant status in recent armed conflicts. The primary status under international law of persons in an international armed conflict will be one of two categories of persons: ‘combatants’ and ‘civilians’. Combatants may fight within the limits imposed by international law applicable in international armed conflict, that is, they may participate directly in hostilities, which members of medical or religious personnel and ‘non-combatants’ may not do because they are excluded—by international law and by a legal act of their party to the conflict—from the authorization to take a direct part in hostilities. The chapter then discusses ‘unlawful combatants’, or what may be considered the better term: ‘unprivileged belligerents’. The term ‘unlawful enemy combatant’ was particularly used after 11 September 2001, to introduce a third category of persons which under existing law may be either combatants or civilians, but are denied such status as not fulfilling essential conditions. To use this third category in order to reduce the individual protection below the minimum standard of human rights is under no circumstances legally acceptable.


TheHandbookconsists of 32 Chapters in seven parts. Part I provides the historical background and sets out some of the contemporary challenges. Part II considers the relevant sources of international law. Part III describes the different legal regimes: land warfare, air warfare, maritime warfare, the law of occupation, the law applicable to peace operations, and the law of neutrality. Part IV introduces key concepts in international humanitarian law: weapons and the notion of superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering, the principle of distinction, proportionality, genocide and crimes against humanity, grave breaches and war crimes, internal armed conflict. Part V looks at key rights: the right to life, the prohibition on torture, the right to fair trial, economic, social and cultural rights, the protection of the environment, the protection of cultural property, and the human rights of the members of the armed forces. Part VI covers key issues such as: the use of force, terrorism, unlawful combatants, the application of human rights in times of armed conflict, forced migration, and issues of gender. Part VII deals with accountability issues including those related to private security companies, the need to focus on armed groups, as well as questions of state responsibility brought before national courts, and finally, the book addresses issues related to transitional justice.


2013 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Marie Kamatali

Since the end of the Cold War, the world has experienced a decrease in international conflict and a significant increase in non-international armed conflict (niac). Despite this change, however, international law has been very slow in adapting its laws that initially were crafted with international armed conflict in mind to the new niac environment. There is a growing recognition that international humanitarian law (ihl) is not well equipped to deal with issues of human rights violations committed during niac. New efforts to make international human rights law (ihrl) applicable in such conflicts have, however, raised more questions than answers. There is still no consensus on whether international human rights law applies to niac. Furthermore, the question on whether non-international armed groups are bound by international human rights obligations remains controversial. This article tries to analyze where international law stands now of these questions. It proposes steps international law could follow to move from its current rhetoric to a more practical solution on these questions. The three solutions proposed are: individual agreements to respect human rights during armed conflict, the possibility of an icj advisory opinion and the option of a protocol additional to international human rights treaties relating to their application in niac.


Author(s):  
Nicolas Michel ◽  
Katherine Del Mar

This chapter examines the different transitional justice mechanisms established to respond to serious international crimes that have occurred in the context of armed conflict. These transitional mechanisms include truth-seeking mechanisms such as truth commissions, commissions of inquiry, and judicial fact-finding. This chapter considers the problems that may arise in the interaction among different transitional justice mechanisms such as protection of the rights of the accused. It also argues that transitional justice requires a coordinated approach among a plurality of mechanisms to assist a society in transitioning from a state of armed conflict in which serious international crimes were committed, to a peaceful and reconciled future.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 474
Author(s):  
Ana Paula Barbosa-Fohrmann

<p>This paper examines the problematic of child soldiers, based on inter alia the strategy of research <br />and study of the United Nations Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for <br />Children and Armed Conflict and on the priorities of the Machel Study. Here, national and international <br />law will be applied on countries where children are recruited by armed groups. Concerning domestic <br />jurisdiction alternative or traditional methods of justice as well as formal legal methods will be <br />addressed. Specifically, this paper will focus on three main subjects: 1) the possibility of prosecution <br />and judgment of adolescents, who participated in armed conflicts; 2) prosecution and judgment of war lords <br />and 3) civil reparation proportional to the damage caused by an armed conflict. These three subjects will <br />be construed according to (traditional or alternative and formal) national and international law. Finally, <br />some recommendations will be made in order to improve the system of reintegration of child soldiers in <br />post-conflict countries.</p>


Author(s):  
W Ochieng

Since the Geneva Conventions, the architecture of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) has been founded upon a distinction between international armed conflict and non-international armed conflict. Today, this claim stands to be revisited since international and non-international armed conflicts are no longer strict organising frameworks for the categorisation of rules of armed conflicts. This is seen in that over fifty years ago, when the four Geneva Conventions were negotiated, the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention were the cornerstones of international law and while their force today is still apparent, the interdependence of states, and global concerns such as terrorism and the commission of widespread human rights violations have eroded the traditional inviolability of borders. The dichotomy in humanitarian law is as implausible today as it is also fundamentally unworkable given the current conditions of conflicts. This dualist conception is no longer adequate to deal with current features of armed conflict, which do not fit neatly into the two categories and frequently contain mixed elements which thus make the task of classification highly complex. The codification of customary rules of international humanitarian law has narrowed the grounds on which the distinctions are predicated. In addition, the two regimes apply simultaneously on multiple situations. Moreover, the question of contemporary armed conflicts raises serious doubts as to whether the traditional understanding of international law still suffices to explain the complexities of modern day armed conflicts. This essay seeks to offer a different perspective on armed conflicts by suggesting a systematic rethinking of the categorisation of conflict. It argues that some of the dilemmas of contemporary conflicts may be attenuated by a new conceptualisation of this bipolar distinction namely a need for a unitary conception of armed conflict.


1983 ◽  
Vol 23 (236) ◽  
pp. 246-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Junod

Human rights, particularly civil and political, have influenced the latest developments in international humanitarian law, especially 1977 Protocol II relating to non-international armed conflicts. At the Teheran Conference in 1968 the United Nations began to reconcile these two branches of international law; it was at this Conference that international humanitarian law was first called “human rights in periods of armed conflict”. This rapprochement was helped further by the adoption in the 1977 Protocols of some basic rules identical to those in the Human Rights Conventions; it helps strengthen the protection of human beings in situations of armed conflict.


2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (905) ◽  
pp. 619-639
Author(s):  
Isabelle Lassée

AbstractIn October 2015, by co-sponsoring United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 30/1 entitled “Promoting Reconciliation, Accountability and Human Rights in Sri Lanka”, the Sri Lankan government formally committed to embarking on a transitional justice process following three decades of armed conflict. Several thousand people allegedly disappeared during this period, often in connection with the armed conflict or as a result of internal disturbances. It is in this context that the Office on Missing Persons (OMP) was operationalized in 2018. This article discusses the nature of tracing investigations into the fate and whereabouts of missing persons of the type to be carried out by the OMP. It argues that these investigations, while ostensibly pursuing a humanitarian approach, cannot be artificially and hermetically separated from criminal justice processes. Further, it seeks to demonstrate that an integrated approach whereby strong linkages with criminal processes are provided for and encouraged best serves the interests of truth and justice.


2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 417-434
Author(s):  
Larissa van den Herik ◽  
Mirjam van Reisen

Abstract International Commissions of Inquiry (COIs) have become important components of the human rights fact-finding, accountability and transitional justice architecture. The core task of COIs is to investigate international crises and construe what happened on the ground. The increasing tendency of states under scrutiny to refuse territorial access frustrates COI performance. It leaves COIs with no option but to operate from outside the state. COIs have developed various strategies to overcome the impediment of the uncooperative state, including the use of satellite imagery, conducting extraterritorial public hearings, interviewing individuals in the territory through Skype and other media as well as collecting accounts from individuals in the diaspora. This article focuses on the engagement of COIs with the diaspora. It presents diasporas as actors that may have considerable significance for COIs in a variety of ways, beyond sharing information. The article unveils the distinct roles that diasporic actors may entertain vis-à-vis international inquiries, as subjects in need of protection, information providers, and audience and mobilization forces. Looking at the COI for Eritrea, the article tests how these different roles play out in practice and how they interrelate. It thus sheds light on the capacity of COIs to make a difference extraterritorially for individuals in the diaspora, and on the capacity of diasporic actors to influence COI findings and shape follow up. The Eritrean COI experience illustrates that a purely instrumental approach towards diasporas – one which only regards diasporas as sources of information and which fails to protect extraterritorially or tap into the greater potential of diaspora mobilization – lessens COI effectivity for broader human rights and transitional justice purposes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document