Protection of Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Event of Armed Conflict: An Imperative for Cultural Heritage, Humanitarian and Human Rights Law

2017 ◽  
Vol 74 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 73-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Blake
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Intangible Cultural Heritage ◽  
Human Rights Law

Protecting the past for the future: How does law protect tangible and intangible cultural heritage in armed conflict?

2015 ◽  
Vol 97 (900) ◽  
pp. 1253-1275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christiane Johannot-Gradis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Identity ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Intangible Cultural Heritage ◽  
The Past ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law

AbstractIn war, individuals are vulnerable not only physically but also in terms of their cultural identity, and the obliteration of cultural heritage often becomes a central issue. This is particularly the case in armed conflicts with an ethnic, cultural or religious character. In some regions, cultural heritage consists more of monuments and objects; it is a “tangible” heritage, mostly protected by the law of armed conflict. Elsewhere, where structures are impermanent, cultural heritage is mainly expressed through orality, gestures, rituals, music and other forms of expression that individuals create using various media and instruments. Such heritage is mainly “intangible”. This essay aims to show that cultural heritage is both tangible and intangible, and that the law which protects such heritage is not limited to the law of armed conflict. Cultural heritage also benefits from the protection of other applicable instruments, such as human rights treaties and the UNESCO cultural heritage conventions.

The Disposition of Movable Cultural Heritage

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patty Gerstenblith
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Cultural Objects ◽  
Un Security Council

Recent conflicts throughout the Middle East and North Africa illustrate that the bifurcation in the international legal regime between those instruments that apply to armed conflict and those that apply to the movement of cultural objects, primarily during peacetime, has severely hampered our ability to protect archaeological sites from looting and has necessitated several sui generis legal instruments, including three UN Security Council resolutions. In addition, questions sometimes arise as to whom and to where cultural objects should be returned following situations of armed conflict and occupation, highlighting a tension between territorial principles that determine a sovereign State’s authority over cultural objects found within its territory and the strong cultural connection that links minority or excluded groups with disputed heritage objects. This chapter thereby points out two areas in which intersections are lacking—the intersection between instruments that regulate armed conflict and those that regulate international movement of cultural objects, and the intersection between cultural heritage law and human rights law. The chapter proposes that if these disparate sources of law could be integrated, more effective protection could be given to cultural heritage during armed conflict and there would be movement toward harmonization of rights of minority groups to cultural heritage and of States within the framework of international law.

Still a blind spot: The protection of LGBT persons during armed conflict and other situations of violence

2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (907-909) ◽  
pp. 237-265
Author(s):  
Alon Margalit
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Blind Spot ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Important Progress

AbstractThis article draws attention to the situation of LGBT persons during armed conflict. Subjected to violence and discrimination outside the context of armed conflict, the latter aggravates their vulnerability and exposure to various abuses. Despite important progress made with respect to their protection under human rights law, a similar effort is largely absent from the international humanitarian law discourse. This article accordingly highlights some of the norms and challenges pertaining to the protection of LGBT persons in time of war.

International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law

1993 ◽  
Vol 33 (293) ◽  
pp. 94-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Doswald-Beck ◽  
Sylvain Vité
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Affairs ◽  
Governmental Organizations ◽  
Non Governmental Organizations ◽  
The United Nations

International humanitarian law is increasingly perceived as part of human rights law applicable in armed conflict. This trend can be traced back to the United Nations Human Rights Conference held in Tehran in 1968 which not only encouraged the development of humanitarian law itself, but also marked the beginning of a growing use by the United Nations of humanitarian law during its examination of the human rights situation in certain countries or during its thematic studies. The greater awareness of the relevance of humanitarian law to the protection of people in armed conflict, coupled with the increasing use of human rights law in international affairs, means that both these areas of law now have a much greater international profile and are regularly being used together in the work of both international and non-governmental organizations.

scholarly journals The redirection of attacks by defending forces

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Tsvetelina van Benthem
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract This article examines the redirection of incoming missiles when employed by defending forces to whom obligations to take precautions against the effects of attacks apply. The analysis proceeds in four steps. In the first step, the possibility of redirection is examined from an empirical standpoint. Step two defines the contours of the obligation to take precautions against the effects of attacks. Step three considers one variant of redirection, where a missile is redirected back towards the adversary. It is argued that such acts of redirection would fulfil the definition of attack under the law of armed conflict, and that prima facie conflicts of obligations could be avoided through interpretation of the feasibility standard embedded in the obligation to take precautions against the effects of attacks. Finally, step four analyzes acts of redirection against persons under the control of the redirecting State. Analyzing this scenario calls for an inquiry into the relationship between the relevant obligations under international humanitarian law and human rights law.

Jurisdictional Immunities of the State for Serious Violations of International Human Rights Law or the Law of Armed Conflict

2013 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 243-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul David Mora
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The State ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
International Human

SummaryIn its recent decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v Italy: Greece Intervening), the International Court of Justice (ICJ) held that Italy had failed to respect immunities enjoyed by Germany under international law when the Italian courts allowed civil actions to be brought against Germany for alleged violations of international human rights law (IHRL) and the law of armed conflict (LOAC) committed during the Second World War. This article evaluates the three arguments raised by Italy to justify its denial of immunity: first, that peremptory norms of international law prevail over international rules on jurisdictional immunities; second, that customary international law recognizes an exception to immunity for serious violations of IHRL or the LOAC; and third, that customary international law recognizes an exception to immunity for torts committed by foreign armed forces on the territory of the forum state in the course of an armed conflict. The author concludes that the ICJ was correct to find that none of these arguments deprived Germany of its right under international law to immunity from the civil jurisdiction of the Italian courts.

The Limits of Human Rights in Times of Armed Conflict and Other Situations of Armed Violence

2019 ◽  
pp. 305-318
Author(s):  
Andrew Clapham
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Laws Of War ◽  
Competing Demands ◽  
The Face ◽  
Armed Violence

Human rights are said to be ill-adapted to times of armed conflict or for dealing with exceptional terrorist threats. Are human rights limited by the applicability of other branches of international law including the laws of war? Are there limits to the work human rights can usefully do in situations of threatened violence when their strict application is said to put lives at risk? This chapter tackles some of the contemporary arguments surrounding the limitations of human rights law in the face of the competing demands of winning the war and killing terrorists. It focuses on killings and detention inside and outside armed conflict. It also asks whether there are limits to the obligations we can impose on armed groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document