Suchergebnisse

The appropriate response to human shields is a recurring issue in modern warfare. Technological asymmetry, disparate obligations, and doctrinal divergence between state and nonstate adversaries combine to make civilians account for 84 percent of combat deaths. Just as a slot machine entices a gambler though he rarely wins, the international community's inconsistent response to human shields has placed shield users on an intermittent reinforcement schedule, thereby ensuring that this tactic remains part of insurgent strategy. Long-term protection of civilians requires eliminating this tactic. Principles of behavior science indicate that an effective way to do so is to uniformly remove its desired consequence--combatants must never allow the presence of shields to impede access to the shielded military objective. This approach is supported by a broader, more forward-thinking conception of the principle of proportionality as reflected in current treaty and customary international law.

This article presents a cultural and critical study of 'proportionality review' as a legal knowledge format and practice. The setting for this study is German public law, and in particular a domain of German legal education that is rarely analyzed even in Germany: the classes and materials offered by Repetitoren. These are commercial providers that aim to prepare students for the all-important 'First Juridical Examination'. In this setting, proportionality is presented as a principle that matters, a doctrine that works, and a technique that jurists – lawyers, judges, but especially also law students – can learn to perform. Sustaining the sense that proportionality 'works', however, itself requires work, in particular in the form of largely invisible background constraints on what can count as suitable problems and appropriate solutions. In these processes of making proportionality into a 'doable' technical instrument, the German legal-constitutional order as a whole is presented as a feasible, achievable project. The article looks at how proportionality's success is produced and experienced, and at what its status as a foundational, near-ideal legal instrument means for the character of the German constitutional and legal imagination.

Given the swift technologic development, it may be expected that the availability of the first truly autonomous weapons systems is fast approaching. Once they are deployed, these weapons will use artificial intelligence to select and attack targets without further human intervention. Autonomous weapons systems raise the question of whether they could comply with international humanitarian law. The principle of proportionality is sometimes cited as an important obstacle to the use of autonomous weapons systems in accordance with the law. This article assesses the question whether the rule on proportionality in attacks would preclude the legal use of autonomous weapons. It analyses aspects of the proportionality rule that would militate against the use of autonomous weapons systems and aspects that would appear to benefit the protection of the civilian population if such weapons systems were used. The article concludes that autonomous weapons are unable to make proportionality assessments on an operational or strategic level on their own, and that humans should not be expected to be completely absent from the battlefield in the near future.

The role of proportionality and individual assessments in EU residency and welfare access cases has changed significantly over the course of the last decade. This article demonstrates how a search for certainty and efficiency in this area of EU law has created greater uncertainty, more legal hurdles for citizens, and less consistency in decision-making at the national level. UK case law illustrates the difficulty faced by national authorities when interpreting and applying the rules relating to welfare access and proportionality. Ultimately, the law lacks the consistency and transparency that recent CJEU case law seeks to obtain, raising the question of whether the shift from the Court's previous, more flexible, case-by-case approach was desirable after all.

International audience ; This paper deals with case-based reasoning and proportionality analysis in the CJEU case-law. The case, constructed by the Court, functions as a framework in which proportionality analysis takes place. The justification of national measures restricting free movement is a subversive process for national governments : it implies an entirely different way of speaking and thinking. This becomes clear when one considers the role of the case in the reasoning of the Court. The objectives of national measures must be reconstructed within a specific intellectual framework and in the context of a specific case. In this process of conceptual translation, accomodating the diversity of cases in the application of a rule is often a proportionality requirement. Nevertheless, and quite paradoxically, it could also make the proportionality of a rule more difficult to establish.

International audience ; This paper deals with case-based reasoning and proportionality analysis in the CJEU case-law. The case, constructed by the Court, functions as a framework in which proportionality analysis takes place. The justification of national measures restricting free movement is a subversive process for national governments : it implies an entirely different way of speaking and thinking. This becomes clear when one considers the role of the case in the reasoning of the Court. The objectives of national measures must be reconstructed within a specific intellectual framework and in the context of a specific case. In this process of conceptual translation, accomodating the diversity of cases in the application of a rule is often a proportionality requirement. Nevertheless, and quite paradoxically, it could also make the proportionality of a rule more difficult to establish.

In this work the concept of principle of proportionality was analyzed and how the mentioned above principle has historically progressed since the ancient times. A huge impact regarding the content of proportionality principle develpment had Germany, since in this country the proportionality test and its elements have been applied for 50 years already. Also, in this work, the concepts of proportionality, such as double proportionality test are discussed. Later, it examines how the proportionality test is applied respectively by the ECJ and the ECtHR and how the elements of test are specifically assessed, for example, the ECJ sometimes applies not the full test but only its elements - adequacy and necessity. In this case, when the proportionality test is applied, the ECJ also takes into account the actions of which subjects are being examined (Member States or EU institutions) in order to choose the intensity and detail of test accordingly. On the same note, the work reviews the recent tendency in the application of the principle of proportionality and compares how the principle is interpreted in similar cases. Analyzing the application of the principle of proportionality in ECJ case law in relation to the protection of personal data, it shall be noted that the principle of proportionality is mainly used to help find balance between different fundamental rights. Examining how different fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality are balanced, it should be stated that the ECJ gives more discretion to the member states, in case the case concerns health care. Nevertheless, the restrictions imposed by the Member States must be proportionate and the least restrictive measure shall be chosen, and it must be ensured that the measures taken are not discriminatory.

In this work the concept of principle of proportionality was analyzed and how the mentioned above principle has historically progressed since the ancient times. A huge impact regarding the content of proportionality principle develpment had Germany, since in this country the proportionality test and its elements have been applied for 50 years already. Also, in this work, the concepts of proportionality, such as double proportionality test are discussed. Later, it examines how the proportionality test is applied respectively by the ECJ and the ECtHR and how the elements of test are specifically assessed, for example, the ECJ sometimes applies not the full test but only its elements - adequacy and necessity. In this case, when the proportionality test is applied, the ECJ also takes into account the actions of which subjects are being examined (Member States or EU institutions) in order to choose the intensity and detail of test accordingly. On the same note, the work reviews the recent tendency in the application of the principle of proportionality and compares how the principle is interpreted in similar cases. Analyzing the application of the principle of proportionality in ECJ case law in relation to the protection of personal data, it shall be noted that the principle of proportionality is mainly used to help find balance between different fundamental rights. Examining how different fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality are balanced, it should be stated that the ECJ gives more discretion to the member states, in case the case concerns health care. Nevertheless, the restrictions imposed by the Member States must be proportionate and the least restrictive measure shall be chosen, and it must be ensured that the measures taken are not discriminatory.

In this work the concept of principle of proportionality was analyzed and how the mentioned above principle has historically progressed since the ancient times. A huge impact regarding the content of proportionality principle develpment had Germany, since in this country the proportionality test and its elements have been applied for 50 years already. Also, in this work, the concepts of proportionality, such as double proportionality test are discussed. Later, it examines how the proportionality test is applied respectively by the ECJ and the ECtHR and how the elements of test are specifically assessed, for example, the ECJ sometimes applies not the full test but only its elements - adequacy and necessity. In this case, when the proportionality test is applied, the ECJ also takes into account the actions of which subjects are being examined (Member States or EU institutions) in order to choose the intensity and detail of test accordingly. On the same note, the work reviews the recent tendency in the application of the principle of proportionality and compares how the principle is interpreted in similar cases. Analyzing the application of the principle of proportionality in ECJ case law in relation to the protection of personal data, it shall be noted that the principle of proportionality is mainly used to help find balance between different fundamental rights. Examining how different fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality are balanced, it should be stated that the ECJ gives more discretion to the member states, in case the case concerns health care. Nevertheless, the restrictions imposed by the Member States must be proportionate and the least restrictive measure shall be chosen, and it must be ensured that the measures taken are not discriminatory.

In this work the concept of principle of proportionality was analyzed and how the mentioned above principle has historically progressed since the ancient times. A huge impact regarding the content of proportionality principle develpment had Germany, since in this country the proportionality test and its elements have been applied for 50 years already. Also, in this work, the concepts of proportionality, such as double proportionality test are discussed. Later, it examines how the proportionality test is applied respectively by the ECJ and the ECtHR and how the elements of test are specifically assessed, for example, the ECJ sometimes applies not the full test but only its elements - adequacy and necessity. In this case, when the proportionality test is applied, the ECJ also takes into account the actions of which subjects are being examined (Member States or EU institutions) in order to choose the intensity and detail of test accordingly. On the same note, the work reviews the recent tendency in the application of the principle of proportionality and compares how the principle is interpreted in similar cases. Analyzing the application of the principle of proportionality in ECJ case law in relation to the protection of personal data, it shall be noted that the principle of proportionality is mainly used to help find balance between different fundamental rights. Examining how different fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality are balanced, it should be stated that the ECJ gives more discretion to the member states, in case the case concerns health care. Nevertheless, the restrictions imposed by the Member States must be proportionate and the least restrictive measure shall be chosen, and it must be ensured that the measures taken are not discriminatory.