This book aims to resolve the dilemma regarding whether armed intervention as a response to gross human rights violations is ever legally justified without Security Council authorisation. Thus far, international lawyers have been caught between giving a negative answer on the basis of the UN Charter's rules ('positivists'), and a 'turn to ethics', declaring intervention legitimate on moral grounds, while eschewing legal analysis ('moralists'). In this volume, a third solution is proposed. The idea is presented that many equitable principles may qualify as 'general principles of law recognised by civilised nations' - one of the three principal sources of international law (though a category that is often overlooked) - a conclusion based upon detailed research of both national legal systems and international law. These principles, having normative force in international law, are then used to craft an equitable framework for humanitarian intervention. It is argued that the dynamics of their operation allow them to interact with the Charter and customary law in order to fill gaps in the existing legal structure and soften the rigours of strict law in certain circumstances. It is posited that many of the moralists' arguments are justified, albeit based upon firm legal principles rather than ethical theory. The equitable framework proposed is designed to provide an answer to the question of how humanitarian intervention may be integrated into the legal realm. Certainly, this will not mean an end to controversies regarding concrete cases of humanitarian intervention. However, it will enable the framing of such controversies in legal terms, rather than as a choice between the law and morality. '...has potential to become one of the most important books in public international law of the decade, or in a generation'. Martin Scheinin, Professor of Public International Law, European University Institute, Florence

The book focuses, through multiple levels of international reality, on the pervasive and widespread effect of the Syrian civil war on the unravelling of established norms---both global or national--- which have determined international relations during the last seven decades. It postulates that since 2011, the Syrian situation has catalysed the breakdown of the international system based on the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions. The core international values fostered by that system now laid waste, among others, are sovereignty, non-interference, sanctity of UN Security Council approval for waging war, human rights, protection of civilian populations, and the right of people to choose their own governments/leaders. By making the UNSC powerless in providing humanitarian assistance or fostering cease-fire and peace-making it has called into question the principles which have been held immutable for seventy years. More importantly, these norms have been breached by their originators. The book takes a wider perspective melding together the civil war's international, regional and national consequences to understand how and why this one event has radiated profound consequences for the international system.

This book analyzes the implementation of Law 975 in Colombia, known as the Justice and Peace Law, and proposes a critical view of the transitional scenario in Colombia from 2005 onwards. The author analyzes three aspects of the law: 1) The process of negotiation with paramilitary groups; 2) The constitution of the Group Memoria Historica (Historic Memory) in Colombia and 3) The process of a 2007 law that was finally not passed. The book contains interviews with key actors in the justice and peace process in Colombia. The author analyses the contradictions, tensions, ambiguities and paradoxes that define the practices of such actors. This book highlights that a critical view of this kind of transitional scenario is indispensable to determine steps towards a just and peaceful society.

The Military Commissions scheme established by President George W. Bush in November 2001 has garnered considerable national and international controversy. In parallel with the detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the creation of military courts has focused significant global attention on the use of such courts as a mechanism to process and try persons suspected of committing terrorist acts or offenses during armed conflict. This book brings together the viewpoints of leading scholars and policy makers on the topic of exceptional courts and military commissions with a series of unique contributions setting out the current state of the field. The book assesses the relationship between such courts and other intersecting and overlapping legal arenas including constitutional law, international law, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law. By examining the comparative patterns, similarities, and disjunctions arising from the use of such courts, this book also analyzes the political and legal challenges that the creation and operation of exceptional courts produces both within democratic states and for the international community.

This book puts forward proposals for solutions to the current gaps between the Mexican legal order and the norms and principles of international criminal law. Adequate legislative measures are suggested for compliance with international obligations. The author approaches the book's subject matter by tracing all norms related to the prosecution of core crimes and contextualizing each of the findings with a brief historical and political account. Additionally, state practice is analyzed, identifying patterns and inconsistencies. This approach is new in offering a wide perspective on international criminal law in Mexico. Relevant legal documents are analyzed and annexed in the book, providing the reader with a useful guide to the topics analyzed. Issues including the following are examined: the incorporation of core crimes in the Mexican legal order, military jurisdiction, the war crimes definition under Mexican law, unaddressed atrocities, state practice and future challenges to combat impunity. The book will be of relevance to legal scholars, students, practitioners of law and human rights advocates. It also offers interesting insights to political scientists, historians and journalists. Tania Ixchel Atilano has a Dr. Iur. from the Humboldt Universitat Berlin, an LLM in German Law from the Ludwig Maximilian Universitat, Munich, and attained her law degree at the ITAM in Mexico City.

Law and Migration is an authoritative volume which draws on statutory and case law to expose the limitations of the law in protecting the individual caught in the complex web of national and regional constraints on migration. International law provides for the exercise of the sovereign power of states to control the entry of non-nationals. However, more recent international conventions have shown a growing awareness of the failure of the law to protect individuals and their families from violation of their human rights and civil liberties. Whilst avoiding open conflict with the principle of sovereignty, national courts have strived to comply with the spirit of human rights conventions and have often decided in favour of individuals. Despite this, border and internal controls on entry continue to proliferate. Globally the failure to establish an adequate legal framework which takes account of forced migration caused by wars and natural disasters has provoked a debate beyond the traditional legal norms. This volume presents a selection of published work from a variety of countriest and addresses the theoretical questions and policy issues which will continue to tax lawyers in the twenty first century.

With 'displacement' as the guiding thread, the purpose of this study is twofold. Firstly, it derives from the relevant provisions of international humanitarian law a legal framework for the protection of displaced persons in armed conflict, both from and during displacement. It contains a case study on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and the recent Advisory Opinion on the Separation Wall, and addresses such issues as humanitarian assistance for displaced persons, the treatment of refugees in the hands of a party to a conflict and the militarisation of refugee camps. Secondly, it examines the issue of displacement within the broader context of civilian war victims and identifies and addresses the normative gaps of international humanitarian law, including the inadequacy of concepts such as 'protected persons' and the persistence of the dichotomy between international and non-international armed conflicts, which is at odds with the realities of contemporary armed conflicts.

The book rethinks the means of harmonization of prima facie norm conflicts in light of the multitude of international agreements across regimes. The methodology deployed in this book, which is referred to as complementation or complementary application, represents a novel approach by focusing on commonly shared objectives and a unifying ordre public transnational across fields of public international law that allow for a harmonization beyond traditional treaty interpretation. Fields of public international law, mainly the laws of armed conflict, international environmental law, and human rights law, apply simultaneously to questions regarding the environment and war. Such a coexistence challenges the unity of the international legal order, and it also challenges the means of harmonization across fields of public international law. However, eventually, the co-existence of several fields of public international law can result in a refinement of international law and enhanced legal protection. Diversification can also contribute to clarification or normative intensification in areas of parallel application of various fields and multilayered legal protection, demonstrating a counter-option to fragmentation.

Human Rights, Democracy, and Legitimacy in a World of Disorder brings together respected scholars from diverse disciplines to examine a trio of key concepts that help to stabilize states and the international order. While used pervasively by philosophers, legal scholars, and politicians, the precise content of these concepts is disputed, and they face new challenges in the conditions of disorder brought by the twenty-first century. This volume will explore the interrelationships and possible tensions between human rights, democracy, and legitimacy, from the philosophical, legal, and political perspectives; as well as the role of these concepts in addressing particular problems such as economic inequality, catastrophic risks posed by new technologies, access to health care, regional governance, and responses to mass migration. Comprising essays arising from an interdisciplinary symposium convened at Harvard Law School in 2016, this volume will examine how these trusted concepts may bring order to the global community.

This book narrates the integration of consumer culture into transnational human rights advocacy and explores its political impact. By examining tactics that include benefit concerts, graphic imagery of suffering, and branded outreach campaigns, the book details the evolution of human rights into a mainstream moral cause. Drawing inspiration from the critical theory of the Frankfurt School, the author argues that these strategies are effective in attracting masses of supporters but weaken the viability of human rights by commodifying its practices. Consumer capitalism co-opts the public's moral awakening and transforms its desire for global engagement into components of a lifestyle expressed through market transactions and commercial relationships, rather than political commitments. Reclaiming human rights as a subversive idea can reconnect the practice of human rights with its principles and generate a movement bound to the radical spirit of human rights.

This book deals with the phenomenon of conflict-related reproductive violence and explores the international legal framework's capacity to respond to it. The international discourse on gender-based violence in conflicts tends to focus on sexualized crimes, which leads to incomplete narratives of the gendered dimensions of armed conflicts. In particular, international law has often remained silent on conflict-related violence affecting or aimed at the victim's reproductive system. The author conceptualizes reproductive violence as a distinct manifestation of gender-based violence and a violation of reproductive autonomy. The analysis explores the historical approaches to reproductive violence and evaluates the current potentials of international criminal law for its prosecution as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In this regard, it also develops proposals for a gender-sensitive interpretation of the existing legal framework as well as possible amendments to it. The book is aimed at researchers and practitioners in the fields of international criminal justice and international human rights law with an interest in gender perspectives on international law, sexualized and gender-based violence, and the discourse on reproductive human rights. Tanja Altunjan is a former researcher at Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin where she obtained her doctoral degree in criminal law.

Could the prevailing view that genocide is the ultimate crime be wrong? Is it possible that it is actually on an equal footing with war crimes and crimes against humanity? Is the power of the word genocide derived from something other than jurisprudence? And why should a hierarchical abstraction assume such importance in conferring meaning on suffering and injustice? Could reducing a reality that is beyond reason and words into a fixed category undermine the very progress and justice that such labelling purports to achieve? For some, these questions may border on the international law equivalent of blasphemy. This original and daring book, written by a renowned scholar and practitioner who was the first Legal Advisor to the UN Prosecutor at The Hague, is a probing reflection on empathy and our faith in global justice.

This book discusses the multilayered legal structures concerning the regulation of crimes under international law. It covers both core crimes and other types of crime under international law, and examines relevant substantive and procedural rules alike. Pursuing such a comprehensive approach is essential to understanding the basic frameworks of international criminal law, since the varied perspectives on international crimes are connected to different systems of enforcement. Being aware of this interrelatedness is conducive to an in-depth examination of individual topics in both substantive and procedural aspects. On the basis of such an inquiry, this book concisely provides a systematic overview of international criminal law.

Cultural objects have been on the move for a long time. Yet there has been no comprehensive survey to date of the current state of affairs with regard to immunity from seizure of foreign cultural objects belonging to foreign States that are on loan for temporary exhibition. This study fills that gap by examining whether there is any rule of (customary) international law stipulating that such cultural objects are immune from seizure, or whether such a rule is emerging. It also examines relevant State practice and the reasons behind it. This volume thus provides greater clarity and legal certainty in the field of lending cultural State property and should be of use both to States and to cultural institutions.

This book investigates the use of duress as a defence in international criminal law, specifically in cases of child soldiers. The prosecution of children for international crimes often only focuses on whether children can and should be prosecuted under international law. However, it is rarely considered what would happen to these children at the trial stage. This work offers a nuanced approach towards international prosecution and considers how children could be implicated and defended in international courts. This study will be of interest to academics and practitioners working in international criminal law, transitional justice and children's rights.

War demands that scholars and policy makers use victory in precise and coherent terms to communicate what the state seeks to achieve in war. The failure historically to define victory in consistent terms has contributed to confused debates when societies consider whether to wage war. This volume explores the development of a theoretical narrative or language of victory to help scholars and policy makers define carefully and precisely what they mean by victory in war in order to achieve a deeper understanding of victory as the foundation of strategy in the modern world.

This volume commemorates the centenary of the First World War (1914-2014) and aims to capture 100 years of warfare evolution. Among the main issues addressed are the changing nature of means and methods of warfare, the law of weaponry, and challenges to humanitarian assistance and protection of the civilian population affected by armed conflict. Specific topics include the legal regime governing nuclear weapons, the prohibition of chemical weapons and arms control, the evolution of naval warfare, asymmetric conflicts, the law of occupation and cultural property. A comprehensive Year in Review also describes the most important events and legal developments that took place in 2014. The Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law is the world's only annual publication devoted to the study of the laws governing armed conflict. It provides a truly international forum for high-quality, peer-reviewed academic articles focusing on this crucial branch of international law. Distinguished by contemporary relevance, the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law bridges the gap between theory and practice and serves as a useful reference tool for scholars, practitioners, military personnel, civil servants, diplomats, human rights workers and students.

This unique new work of reference traces the origins of the modern laws of warfare from the earliest times to the present day. Relying on written records from as far back as 2400 BCE, and using sources ranging from the Bible to Security Council Resolutions, the author pieces together the history of a subject which is almost as old as civilisation itself. The author shows that as long as humanity has been waging wars it has also been trying to find ways of legitimising different forms of combatants and regulating the treatment of captives. This first book on warfare deals with the broad question of whether the patterns of dealing with combatants and captives have changed over the last 5,000 years, and if so, how? In terms of context, the first part of the book is about combatants and those who can 'lawfully' take part in combat. In many regards, this part of the first volume is a series of 'less than ideal' pathways. This is because in an ideal world there would be no combatants because there would be no fighting. Yet as a species we do not live in such a place or even anywhere near it, either historically or in contemporary times. This being so, a second-best alternative has been to attempt to control the size of military forces and, therefore, the bloodshed. This is also not the case by which humanity has worked over the previous centuries. Rather, the clear assumption for thousands of years has been that authorities are allowed to build the size of their armed forces as large as they wish. The restraints that have been applied are in terms of the quality and methods by which combatants are taken. The considerations pertain to questions of biology such as age and sex, geographical considerations such as nationality, and the multiple nuances of informal or formal combatants. These questions have also overlapped with ones of compulsion and whether citizens within a country can be compelled to fight without their consent. Accordingly, for the previous 3,000 years, the question has not been whether there should be a limit on the number of soldiers, but rather who is or is not a lawful combatant. It has rarely been a question of numbers. It has been, and remains, one of type. The second part of this book is about people, typically combatants, captured in battle. It is about what happens to their status as prisoners, about the possibilities of torture, assistance if they are wounded and what happens to their remains should they be killed and their bodies fall into enemy hands. The theme that ties all of these considerations together is that all of the acts befall those who are, to one degree or another, captives of their enemies. As such, they are no longer masters of their own fate. As a work of reference this first volume, as part of a set of three, is unrivalled, and will be of immense benefit to scholars and practitioners researching and advising on the laws of warfare. It also tells a story which throws fascinating new light on the history of international law and on the history of warfare itself.

How, despite the enormous investment of blood and treasure, has the West's ten-year intervention left Afghanistan so lawless and insecure? The answer is more insidious than any conspiracy, for it begins with a profound lack of understanding of the rule of law, the very thing that most dramatically separates Western societies from the benighted ones in which they increasingly intervene. This volume of essays argues that the rule of law is not a set of institutions that can be exported lock, stock and barrel to lawless lands, but a state of affairs under which ordinary people and officials of the state itself feel it makes sense to act within the law. Where such a state of affairs is absent, as in Afghanistan today, brute force, not law, will continue to rule.

Why do international criminal tribunals write histories of the origins and causes of armed conflicts? Richard Ashby Wilson conducted empirical research with judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and expert witnesses in three international criminal tribunals to understand how law and history are combined in the courtroom. Historical testimony is now an integral part of international trials, with prosecutors and defense teams using background testimony to pursue decidedly legal objectives. Both use historical narratives to frame the alleged crimes and to articulate their side's theory of the case. In the Slobodan Milo evi trial, the prosecution sought to demonstrate special intent to commit genocide by reference to a long-standing animus, nurtured within a nationalist mind-set. For their part, the defense calls historical witnesses to undermine charges of superior responsibility, and to mitigate the sentence by representing crimes as reprisals. Although legal ways of knowing are distinctive from those of history, the two are effectively combined in international trials in a way that challenges us to rethink the relationship between law and history.

This book analyzes emergency legislations formed in response to terrorism. In recognition that different countries, with different legal traditions, have different solutions, it adopts a comparative point of view. The countries profiled include America, France, Israel, Poland, Germany and United Kingdom. The goal is not to offer judgment on one response or the other. Rather, the contributors offer a comprehensive and thoughtful examination of the entire concept. In the process, they draw attention to the inadaptability of traditional legal and philosophical categories in a new and changing political world. The contributors first criticize the idea of these legislations. They then go on to develop different models to respond to these crises. They build a general analytical framework by answering such questions as: What is an emergency legislation? What kinds of emergencies justify laws of this nature? Why is contemporary terrorism such a specific emergency justifying new laws? Using legal and philosophical reflections, this study looks at how we are changing society. Coverage also provides historical experiences of emergency legislations to further illustrate this point. In the end, readers will gain insight into the long-term consequences of these legislations and how they modify the very work of the rule of law.

Ideas of collective responsibility challenge the doctrine of individual responsibility that is the dominant paradigm in law and liberal political theory. But little attention is given to the consequences of holding groups accountable for wrongdoing. Groups are not amenable to punishment in the way that individuals are. Can they be punished - and if so, how - or are other remedies available? The topic crosses the borders of law, philosophy and political science, and in this volume specialists in all three areas contribute their perspectives. They examine the limits of individual criminal liability in addressing atrocity, the meanings of punishment and responsibility, the distribution of group punishment to a group's members, and the means by which collective accountability can be expressed. In doing so, they reflect on the legacy of the Nuremberg Trials, on the philosophical understanding of collective responsibility, and on the place of collective accountability in international political relations.

This book examines to what extent the right of self-defence, as laid down in Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, permits States to launch military operations against other States. In particular, it focuses on the occurrence of an 'armed attack' - the crucial trigger for the activation of this right. In light of the developments since 9/11, the author analyses relevant physical and verbal customary practice, ranging from the 1974 Definition of Aggression to recent incidents such as the 2001 US intervention in Afghanistan and the 2006 Israeli intervention in Lebanon. The notion of 'armed attack' is examined from a threefold perspective. What acts can be regarded as an 'armed attack'? When can an 'armed attack' be considered to take place? And from whom must an 'armed attack' emanate? By way of conclusion, the different findings are brought together in a draft 'Definition of Armed Attack'.

The purpose of the jus ad bellum is to draw a line in the sand: thus far, but no further. In the light of modern warfare, a state should today have an explicitly recognised and undisputed right of delimited unilateral defence not only in response to an occurring armed attack, but also in interception of an inevitable or imminent armed attack. This book, however, makes it evident that unilateral interception is not incontestably compatible with the modern right of self-defence in Article 51 of the UN Charter. Then again, unilateral defence need not forever be confined to self-defence only, wherefore the book proposes that the concept of defence may best be modernised by a clear legal division into responsive and interceptive defence. Since both threat and use of force are explicitly prohibited in Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, this book further recommends that both responsive and interceptive defence should be explicitly excepted from this prohibition in Article 51 of the UN Charter. The modern jus ad bellum should thus legally recognise a dual face of defence: responsive self-defence if an armed attack occurs, and interceptive necessity-defence if a grave and urgent threat of an armed attack occurs. For without a clarifying and modernising revision, the concept of defence will become irreparably blurred until it is completely dissolved into the ever-shifting sands of war.