Normative demarcations of the right to life in a globalized world: Conflicts between Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law as markers

2016 ◽  
Vol 99 (3) ◽  
pp. 234-253
Author(s):  
Dana Schmalz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The Right ◽  
Globalized World

Rethinking the Permissive Function of Military Necessity in Internal Non-International Armed Conflict

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosuke Onishi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Jus Ad Bellum ◽  
Military Necessity ◽  
The Right

This article advocates limiting the permissive impact of military necessity on the right to life. It has been argued that military necessity justifies deviations from international human rights law (IHRL) because this body of law is inadequate to deal with the necessities arising out of armed conflict. The article argues that while this rationale is convincing, it should not mean that conduct that is lawful under humanitarian law is necessarily also lawful under human rights law. The degree of force that may be used under international humanitarian law (IHL) is often superfluous. In some instances such violence is tempered by thejus ad bellum, but this body of law does not apply in internal non-international armed conflict (NIAC). The article concludes by exploring the potential for IHRL to play a role in tempering superfluous violence in NIAC that is similar to that whichjus ad bellumplays in international conflict.

Use of force during occupation: law enforcement and conduct of hostilities

2012 ◽  
Vol 94 (885) ◽  
pp. 267-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Watkin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
Simultaneous Application ◽  
Occupied Territory ◽  
The Right ◽  
Governing Law

AbstractThis article explores the law governing the maintenance of public order and safety during belligerent occupation. Given the potential for widespread violence associated with international armed conflict, such as occurred in 2003–2004 in Iraq, it is inevitable that military and police forces will be engaged in activities that interface and overlap. Human-rights-based norms governing law enforcement, such as the right to life, are found in humanitarian law, permitting an application of both law enforcement and conduct of hostilities norms under that body of law. This results in the simultaneous application of these norms through both humanitarian and human rights law, which ultimately enhances the protection of inhabitants of the occupied territory.

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.

scholarly journals Protection of the Right to Life under Modern International Law and Prophetic Law: A Comparative Study

rahatulquloob ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2(2)) ◽  
pp. 52-74
Author(s):  
Muhammad Sohail ◽  
Saqib Jawad
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Primary Concern ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The One ◽  
The Right ◽  
Substantive Law

The right to life is often said to be mother right and most important fundamen-tal right of all rights. The application and criteria of protection of the right to life differs under international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights law (HRL). As a general conception, IHL is applicable only during armed conflict and HRL is applicable in all other situations excepting armed conflict. This conception though has been proved to be wrong, however, the primary concern regarding the protection of the right to life during armed conflict is that of IHL. However, it does not mean that HRL has nothing to do with an armed conflict or IHL is having no concern about the protection of the right to life beyond armed conflict, rather it means that standard and criteria of protection of the right to life during armed conflict differs in both these branches of internatio-nal. When the question arises with regard to the protection of the right to life during armed conflict, different answers are found in both these disciplines. The substantive law as well as case law of both the branches differ in this regard to such an extent that a person may lose the protection of his right to life under IHL on the one hand, while still holding such protection under HRL on the other. While Islamic Law does not differentiate between humanitarian law and human rights law, rather in Islam, protection of the right to lie has been ensured on equal footings in and outside an armed conflict. The paper focuses the main causes of differences between IHL and HRL. Consequently, sorting out the best possible manner in which such differences can be removed and resultantly by recommending the standard and criteria as to how the right to life can be best protected.

Rules of Engagement and Human Rights Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 185-239
Author(s):  
J.F.R. Boddens Hosang
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

This chapter analyses the interaction between rules of engagement (ROE) and international human rights law. To support the analysis, the chapter first discusses the extraterritorial applicability of international human rights law in the context of international military operations, drawing on the case law of several human rights law bodies. The chapter then discusses the interaction between international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law, including a discussion of the differences in meaning of the concepts of necessity and proportionality in each paradigm. The role of international human rights law in the ROE is discussed, especially regarding the right to life.

An Operational Perspective

2019 ◽  
pp. 91-108
Author(s):  
Hans Boddens Hosang
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Right

The chapter explores the challenges related to the conduct of operations and the preparations for such operations as regards implementing international humanitarian law and international human rights law, exploring some of the differences between the two systems. In particular, the concepts of necessity and proportionality are examined, as well as the right to life and issues related to capture and detention, and the different meanings of those concepts and their scope in each of the two paradigms. As regards international humanitarian law, the chapter also discusses a number of challenges to interoperability in multinational military operations. The discussion on international human rights law, on the other hand, focuses on the inherent challenges in implementing that body of law in the context of (multinational) military operations outside a nation’s own borders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document