How relevant is the concept of war today? This book examines how notions about war continue to influence how we conceive rights and obligations in national and international law. It also considers the role international law plays in limiting what is forbidden and legitimated in times of war or armed conflict. The book highlights how, even though war has been outlawed and should be finished as an institution, states nevertheless continue to claim that they can wage necessary wars of self-defence, engage in lawful killings in war, imprison law-of-war detainees, and attack objects which are said to be part of a war-sustaining economy. The book includes an overall account of the contemporary laws of war and delves into whether states should be able to continue to claim so-called 'belligerent rights' over their enemies and those accused of breaching expectations of neutrality. A central claim in the book is as follows: while there is general agreement that war has been abolished as a legal institution for settling disputes, the time has come to admit that the belligerent rights that once accompanied states at war are no longer available. The conclusion is that claiming to be in a war or an armed conflict does not grant anyone a licence to kill people, destroy things, and acquire other people's property or territory.

This book situates the war in Syria within the actual and imagined system of international criminal justice. It explores the legal impediments and diplomatic challenges that have led to the fatal trinity affecting Syria: the massive commission of international crimes that are subject to detailed investigations and documentation but whose perpetrators have enjoyed virtually complete impunity. Given this tragic state of affairs, the book tracks a number of accountability solutions being explored within multilateral initiatives and by civil society actors, including innovations of institutional design; the renewed utility of a range of domestic jurisdictional principles (including the revival of universal jurisdiction in Europe); the emergence of creative investigative and documentation techniques, technologies, and organizations; and the rejection of state consent as a precondition for the exercise of jurisdiction. Engaging both law and policy around international justice, the text offers a set of justice blueprints, within and without the International Criminal Court. It also considers the utility, propriety, and practicality of pursuing a transitional justice program without a genuine political transition. All told, the book attempts to capture results of the creative energy radiating from members of the international community intent on advancing the accountability norm in Syria even in the face of geopolitical blockages within the U.N. Security Council. In so doing, it presents the range of juridical measures-both criminal and civil - that would be available to the international community to respond to the crisis, if only the political will existed.

Rogue States is a collection of essays written by Chomsky in the late 1990s, all of which subvert the United States foreign policy discourse and the notion of the "rogue state", turning the focus of criticism inwards and demonstrating how Western powers fail to uphold their own standards of conduct. Among the topics considered are the Balkans Crisis, the embargo against Cuba, and US intervention in Latin America, all of which provide important lessons for today from one of our most eminent and insightful teachers.

On Australia Day 1990, a 73-year-old man was plucked from the Adelaide suburbs and accused of helping massacre nearly 900 men, women and children in Nazi-occupied Ukraine. David Bevan describes the legal maneuverings that followed in a compelling work of courtroom drama.

This is the third volume of a projected five-volume series charting the causes of war from 3000 BCE to the present day, written by a leading international lawyer, and using as its principal materials the documentary history of international law, largely in the form of treaties and the negotiations which led up to them. These volumes seek to show why millions of people, over thousands of years, slew each other. In departing from the various theories put forward by historians, anthropologists and psychologists, Gillespie offers a different taxonomy of the causes of war, focusing on the broader settings of politics, religion, migrations and empire-building. These four contexts were dominant and often overlapping justifications during the first four thousand years of human civilisation, for which written records exist.

International law has long differentiated between international and non-international armed conflicts, traditionally regulating the former far more comprehensively than the latter. This is particularly stark in the case of detention, where the law of non-international armed conflict contains no rules on who may be detained, what processes must be provided to review their detention, and when they must be released. Given that non-international armed conflicts are now the most common form of conflict, this is especially worrying, and the consequences of this have been seen in the detention practices of states such as the US and UK in Iraq and Afghanistan. This book provides a comprehensive examination of the procedural rules that apply to detention in non-international armed conflict, with the focus on preventive security detention, or 'internment'. All relevant areas of international law, most notably international humanitarian law and international human rights law, are analysed in detail and the interaction between them explored. The book gives an original account of the relationship between the relevant rules of IHL and IHRL, which is firmly grounded in general international law scholarship, treating the issue as a matter of treaty interpretation. With that in mind, and with reference to State practice in specific non-international armed conflicts - including those in Sri Lanka, Colombia, Nepal, Afghanistan, and Iraq - it is demonstrated that the customary and treaty obligations of States under human rights law continue, absent derogation, to apply to detention in non-international armed conflicts. The practical operation of those rules is then explored in detail. The volume ends with a set of concrete proposals for developing the law in this area, in a manner that builds upon, rather than replaces, the existing obligations of States and non-State armed groups.

Human security provides one of the most important protections; a person-centred axis of freedom from fear, from want and to live with dignity. It is surprising given its centrality to the human experience, that its connection with human rights has not yet been explored in a truly systematic way. This important new book addresses that gap in the literature by analysing whether human security might provide the tools for an expansive and integrated interpretation of international human rights. The examination takes a two-part approach. Firstly, it evaluates convergences between human security and all human rights - civil, political, economic, social and cultural - and constructs an investigative framework focused on the human security-human rights synergy. It then goes on to explore its practical application in the thematic cores of violence against women and undocumented migrants in the law and case-law of UN, European, Inter-American and African human rights bodies. It takes both a legal and interdisciplinary approach, recognising that human security and its relationship with human rights cuts across disciplinary boundaries. Innovative and rigorous, this is an important contribution to human rights scholarship.

This timely volume seeks to examine two of the most pertinent current challenges faced by asylum seekers in gaining access to international refugee protection: first, the obstacles to physical access to territory and, second, the barriers to accessing a quality asylum procedure - which the editors have termed 'access to justice'. To address these aims, the book brings together leading commentators from a range of backgrounds, including law, sociology and political science. It also includes contributions from NGO practitioners. This allows the collection to offer interdisciplinary analysis and to incorporate both theoretical and practical perspectives on questions of immense contemporary significance. While the examination offers a strong focus on European legal and policy developments, the book also addresses the issues in different regions (Europe, North America, the Middle East, Africa and Australia). Given the currency of the questions under debate, this book will be essential reading for all scholars in the field of asylum law.

Law and Morality at War develops a normative framework within which the law of armed conflict should be evaluated, interpreted, and reformed. The book defends existing protections for civilians, proposes new protections for combatants, and interprets vague and ambiguous rules - including discrimination, precautions, and proportionality - in their morally best light. The book makes original contributions to a variety of current debates in moral and legal philosophy, including the justification of legal authority, moral liability to defensive harm, and moral choice under uncertainty. At the same time, the book directly confronts the complex problems of the modern battlefield, including the use of human shields. Both theoretical and practical, the book aims to better guide combatants and better protect civilians. With a new preface addressing recent developments and continued armed conflict.

This is the second volume of a projected five-volume series charting the causes of war from 3000 BCE to the present day, written by a leading international lawyer, and using as its principal materials the documentary history of international law, largely in the form of treaties and the negotiations which led up to them. These volumes seek to show why millions of people, over thousands of years, slew each other. In departing from the various theories put forward by historians, anthropologists and psychologists, Gillespie offers a different taxonomy of the causes of war, focusing on the broader settings of politics, religion, migrations and empire-building. These four contexts were dominant and often overlapping justifications during the first four thousand years of human civilisation, for which written records exist.

Belligerent occupations existed in both World Wars and have occurred more recently in all parts of the world (including Iraq, Afghanistan, the former Yugoslavia, Congo, Northern Cyprus, Nagorno-Karabakh, Georgia, Eritrea and Ethiopia). Owing to its special length - exceeding half a century and still in progress - and the unprecedented flow of judicial decisions, a special focus is called for as regards to the occupation of Palestinian territories by Israel. International law addresses the subject of belligerent occupation in some detail. This second, revised edition updates the text (originally published in 2009) in terms of both State practice and doctrinal discourse. The emphasis is put on decisions of the Security Council; legislation adopted by the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq; and predominantly case law: international (Judgments of the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the European Court of Human Rights; Advisory Opinions and Arbitral Awards) as well as domestic courts.

This book analyses the legal framework for refugee protection in Africa, including both refugee and human rights law as well as treaty and institutional elements. The regime is addressed in two parts. Part One analyses the relevant treaties: the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the 1969 Organization of African Unity Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa and the 1981 African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights. The latter two regional instruments are examined in depth. This includes the first fulsome account of the African Refugee Conventions drafting, an interpretation of its unique refugee definition and original analysis of the relationships between the three treaties. Significant attention is devoted to the systemic relationship between the international and the regional refugee treaties and to the discrete relationships of conflict and complementary relationships between the two refugee instruments, as well as to the relationships between the African Refugee Convention and African Charter. Part Two focuses on the institutional architecture supporting the treaty framework. The Organization of African Unity is addressed in a historical sense, and the contemporary roles of the African Union, the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights and the current and contemplated African human rights courts are examined. This book is the first devoted to the legal framework for refugee protection in Africa.

This book provides the first comprehensive analysis of factors that transform a prima facie non-international armed conflict (NIAC) into an international armed conflict (IAC) and the consequences that follow from this process of internationalization. It examines in detail the historical development as well as the current state of the relevant rules of international humanitarian law. The discussion is grounded in general international law, complemented with abundant references to case law, and illustrated by examples from twentieth and twenty-first century armed conflicts. In Part I, the book puts forward a thorough catalogue of modalities of conflict internationalization that includes outside intervention, State dissolution, and recognition of belligerency. It then specifically considers the legal qualification of complex situations that feature more than two conflict parties and contrasts the mechanism of internationalization of armed conflicts with the reverse process of de-internationalization. Part II of the book challenges the conventional wisdom that members of non-State armed groups do not normally benefit from combatant status. It argues that the majority of fighters belonging to non-State armed groups in most types of internationalized armed conflicts are in fact eligible for combatant status. Finally, Part III turns to belligerent occupation, traditionally understood as a leading example of a notion that cannot be transposed to armed conflicts occurring in the territory of a single State. By contrast, the book argues in favour of the applicability of the law of belligerent occupation to internationalized armed conflicts.

When faced with those who act with impunity, we seek the protection of law. We rely upon the legal system for justice, from international human rights law that establishes common standards of protection, to international criminal law that spearheads efforts to end impunity for the most heinous atrocities. While legal processes are perceived to combat impunity, and despite the ready availability of the law, accountability often remains elusive. What if the law itself enables impunity? Law's Impunity asks this question in the context of the modern Private Military Company (PMC), examining the relationship between law and the concepts of responsibility and impunity. This book proposes that ordinary legal processes do not neutralise, but rather legalise impunity. This radical idea is applied to the abysmal record of human rights violations perpetrated by the modern PMC and the shocking absence of accountability. This book demonstrates how the law organises, rather than overcomes, impunity by detailing how the modern PMC exploits ordinary legal processes to systematically exclude itself from legal responsibility. Thus, Law's Impunity offers an alternative to conventional thinking about the law, providing an innovative approach to assess and refine the rigour of legal processes in the ongoing quest to end impunity.

The four Geneva Conventions, adopted in 1949, remain the fundamental basis of contemporary international humanitarian law. They protect the wounded and sick on the battlefield, those wounded, sick or shipwrecked at sea, prisoners of war, and civilians in time of war. However, since they were adopted warfare has changed considerably. In this groundbreaking commentary over sixty international law experts investigate the application of the Geneva Conventions and explain how they should be interpreted today. It places the Conventions in the light of the developing obligations imposed by international law on states, armed groups, and individuals, most notably through international human rights law and international criminal law. The context in which the Conventions are to be applied and interpreted has changed considerably since they were first written. The borderline between international and non-international armed conflicts is not as clear-cut as was once thought, and is complicated further by the use of armed force mandated by the United Nations and the complex mixed and transnational nature of certain non-international armed conflicts. The influence of other developing branches of international law, such as human rights law and refugee law has been considerable. The development of international criminal law has breathed new life into multiple provisions of the Geneva Conventions. This commentary adopts a thematic approach to provide detailed analysis of each key issue dealt with by the Conventions, taking into account both judicial decisions and state practice. Cross-cutting chapters on issues such as transnational conflicts and the geographical scope of the Conventions also give readers a full understanding of the meaning of the Geneva Conventions in their contemporary context. Prepared under the auspices of the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, this commentary on four of the most important treaties in international law is unmissable for anyone working in or studying situations of armed conflicts.

In July 2016, the Supreme Court of India held that the use of excessive or retaliatory force by the security forces is not permissible in the course of the discharge of their duty under the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA), and that the Act does not allow blanket immunity to perpetrators of unjustified deaths. Recently, the Supreme Court directed that FIRs be lodged against security personnel engaged in encounter killings. This ruling has serious ramifications for the forces deployed in counter-insurgency operations. The AFSPA has become one of the most controversial laws, both in India and the world. The loud and continuous clamour against the Act has drawn the attention of various international organizations. In May 2017, the UN Human Rights Council, during the Universal Periodic Review of India's human rights record called for bringing the provisions of the AFSPA in line with the international human rights treaties. The armed forces, however, maintain that the AFSPA is a functional requirement for tackling the growing menace of insurgency and protecting their men from the unnecessary harassment caused by litigation. On the other hand, the Delhi High Court has recently directed the Government of India to pay a compensation of Rs 55 lakh to an air force pilot who was injured while flying a poorly maintained MiG 21 aircraft. This case highlights the other side of the issue of human rights in the context of members of the armed and security forces. This book will help to enhance the understanding of the legal position of the armed forces, which is of paramount importance today due to the blurring of the lines between national security, anti-insurgency operations and law enforcement. It will also create an awareness of the difficulties being faced by the armed forces during domestic deployment and of the need to protect the rights of military and security personnel. The book provides an insight into the legislative efforts of other democracies to meet the challenges of growing terrorism. It delves into cases of human rights violations in which members of the armed forces have been implicated. It concludes by identifying current deficiencies in the legal system and makes a few recommendations for the consideration of the government and armed forces.

When foreign powers attack civilians, other countries face an impossible dilemma. Two courses of action emerge: either to retaliate against an abusive government on behalf of its victims, or to remain spectators. Either course offers its own perils: the former, lost lives and resources without certainty of restoring peace or preventing worse problems from proliferating; the latter, cold spectatorship that leaves a country at the mercy of corrupt rulers or to revolution. Philosophers Fernando Teson and Bas van der Vossen offer contrasting views of humanitarian intervention, defining it as either war aimed at ending tyranny, or as violence. The authors employ the tools of impartial modern analytic philosophy, particularly just war theory, to substantiate their claims. According to Teson, a humanitarian intervention has the same just cause as a justified revolution: ending tyranny. He analyzes the different kinds of just cause and whether or not an intervener may pursue other justified causes. For Teson, the permissibility of humanitarian intervention is almost exclusively determined by the rules of proportionality. Bas van der Vossen, by contrast, holds that military intervention is morally impermissible in almost all cases. Justified interventions, Van der Vossen argues, must have high ex ante chance of success. Analyzing the history and prospects of intervention shows that they almost never do. Teson and van der Vossen refer to concrete cases, and weigh the consequences of continued or future intervention in Syria, Somalia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Iraq, Lybia and Egypt. By placing two philosophers in dialogue, Debating Humanitarian Intervention is not constrained by a single, unifying solution to the exclusion of all others. Rather, it considers many conceivable actions as judged by analytic philosophy, leaving the reader equipped to make her own, informed judgments.

The chief means to limit and calculate the costs of war are the philosophical and legal concepts of proportionality and necessity. Both categories are meant to restrain the most horrific potential of war. The volume explores the moral and legal issues in the modern law of war in three major categories. In so doing, the contributions will look for new and innovative approaches to understanding the process of weighing lives implicit in all theories of jus in bello: who counts in war, understanding proportionality, and weighing lives in asymmetric conflicts. These questions arise on multiple levels and require interdisciplinary consideration of both philosophical and legal themes.

The second edition of this well received handbook provides a comprehensive overview and annotated commentary of those areas of international law most relevant to the planning and conduct of military operations. It covers a wide scope of military operations, ranging from operations conducted under UN Security Council mandate to (collective) self-defence and consensual and humanitarian operations and identifies the relevant legal bases and applicable legal regimes governing the application of force and treatment of persons during such operations. It also devotes attention to the law governing the status of forces, military use of the sea and airspace and questions of international (criminal) responsibility for breaches of international law. New developments such as cyber warfare and controversial aspects of law in relation to contemporary operations, such as targeted killing of specific individuals are discussed and analysed, alongside recent developments in more traditional types of operations, such as peacekeeping and naval operations. The book is aimed at policy officials, commanders and their (military) legal advisors who are involved with the planning and conduct of any type of military operation and is intended to complement national and international policy and legal guidelines and assist in identifying and applying the law to ensure legitimacy and contribute to mission accomplishment. It likewise fulfils a need in pertinent international organizations, such as the UN, NATO, Regional Organizations, and NGOs. It also serves as a comprehensive work of reference to academics and is suitable for courses at military staff colleges, academies and universities, which devote attention to one or more aspects of international law treated in the book. This mix of intended users is reflected in the contributors who include senior (former) policy officials and (military) legal advisors, alongside academics engaged in teaching and research in these areas of international law.

The prohibition of the use of force in international law is one of the major achievements of international law in the past century. The attempt to outlaw war as a means of national policy and to establish a system of collective security after both World Wars resulted in the creation of the United Nations Charter, which remains a principal point of reference for the law on the use of force to this day. There have, however, been considerable challenges to the law on the prohibition ofThe prohibition of the use of force in international law is one of the major achievements of international law in the past century. The attempt to outlaw war as a means of national policy and to establish a system of collective security after both World Wars resulted in the creation of the United Nations Charter, which remains a principal point of reference for the law on the use of force to this day. There have, however, been considerable challenges to the law on the prohibition of the use of force over the past two decades. This Oxford Handbook is a comprehensive and authoritative study of the modern law on the use of force. Over seventy experts in the field offer a detailed analysis, and to an extent a restatement, of the law in this area. The Handbook reviews the status of the law on the use of force, and assesses what changes, if any, have occurred in consequence to recent developments. It offers cutting-edge and up-to-date scholarship on all major aspects of the prohibition of the use of force. The work is set in context by an extensive introductory section, reviewing the history of the subject, recent challenges, and addressing major conceptual approaches. Its second part addresses collective security, in particular the law and practice of the United Nations organs, and of regional organizations and arrangements. It then considers the substance of the prohibition of the use of force, and of the right to self-defence and associated doctrines. The next section is devoted to armed action undertaken on behalf of peoples and populations. This includes self-determination conflicts, resistance to armed occupation, and forcible humanitarian and pro-democratic action. The possibility of the revival of classical, expansive justifications for the use of force is then addressed. This is matched by a final section considering new security challenges and the emerging law in relation to them. Finally, the key arguments developed in the book are tied together in a substantive conclusion. The Handbook will be essential reading for scholars and students of international law and the use of force, and legal advisers to both government and NGOs.

Increasingly, European states are using policy on the reception of asylum seekers as an instrument of immigration control, eg by deterring the lodging of asylum applications, preventing integration into their societies and exercising a large degree of control over asylum seekers in order to facilitate expulsion. The European Union is currently engaged in a process of developing minimum conditions for the reception of asylum seekers, as part of a Common European Asylum System. This book critically examines the outcomes of the negotiation process on these minimum standards - Directive 2003/9/EC and Directive 2013/33/EU - in relation to international refugee law, international social security law and international human rights law. It presents a comprehensive analysis of state obligations that stem from these different fields of law with regard to asylum seekers' access to the labour market and social security benefits and compares them to the minimum standards developed in the European Union. To this end, it offers an in-depth study into the notion of non-discrimination on the basis of nationality in the field of social security and a detailed analysis of recent developments in the case law of the European Court on Human Rights on positive obligations in the socioeconomic sphere. It takes into account both the special characteristics of international legal obligations for states in the socioeconomic sphere and the legal consequences of the tentative legal status of asylum seekers. In addition, this book particularly examines how the instrumental use of social policy relates to international law.

The laws are not silent in war, but what should they say? What is the moral function of the law of armed conflict? Should the law protect civilians who do not fight but help those who do? Should the law protect soldiers who perform non-combat functions or who may be safely captured? How certain should a soldier be that an individual is a combatant rather than a civilian before using lethal force? What risks should soldiers take on themselves to avoid harming civilians? When do inaccurate weapons become unlawfully indiscriminate? When does 'collateral damage' to civilians become unlawfully disproportionate? Should civilians lose their legal rights by serving, voluntarily or involuntarily, as human shields? Finally, when should killing civilians constitute a war crime? These are the questions that Law and Morality at War answers, contributing to a cutting-edge international debate. Drawing on the concepts and methods of contemporary moral and legal philosophy, the book develops a normative framework within which the laws of war and international criminal law can be evaluated, criticized, and reformed. While several philosophical works critically examine the moral status of civilians and combatants, this book fills a gap, offering both an account of the laws of war and war crimes, and proposing how the law could be improved from a moral point of view.