Suchergebnisse

The protection of refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs) is guaranteed under International Humanitarian Law (IHL) -- mainly the Geneva Convention of 1949 and two additional Protocols of 1977, and the Refugee Convention of 1951 and the Protocol of 1967. Islam requires believers to assist and protect vulnerable people and offers a number of mechanisms for their care and support. However, Islam and Islamic sharia do not offer a comprehensive legal system for the protection of refugees and IDPs, at least not according to current understanding of protection. There has in recent years been some debate about the UDHR in the Islamic world, mainly on the issue of whether it is compatible with sharia. Adapted from the source document.

International humanitarian law ("IHL"), or the law of armed conflict ("LOAC"), is a branch of international law designed to regulate the conduct of belligerent states during an armed conflict. [1] However, conflicts in the modern era are drastically different than the interstate hostilities envisioned at the time the bulk of IHL was developed. Contemporary conflicts, such as the 'War on Terror' between states and non-state actors, have resulted in new military tactics to address the complications inherent in these modern conflicts. The controversial use of targeted killing is amongst these new tactics. For the purposes of this discussion, targeted killing is the "intentional slaying of a specific alleged terrorist or group of alleged terrorists undertaken with explicit governmental approval where they cannot be arrested using reasonable means." [2] The inability to arrest suspected terrorists reflects the transnational aspect to these conflicts as the victim state is unable to exert enforcement jurisdiction beyond its borders. [3] Until such time as new international norms develop to specifically address targeted killing, the legality of this tactic must be assessed against existing IHL. Under contemporary IHL, targeted killing is lawful although highly circumscribed. ; Publisher PDF

International humanitarian law ("IHL"), or the law of armed conflict ("LOAC"), is a branch of international law designed to regulate the conduct of belligerent states during an armed conflict. [1] However, conflicts in the modern era are drastically different than the interstate hostilities envisioned at the time the bulk of IHL was developed. Contemporary conflicts, such as the 'War on Terror' between states and non-state actors, have resulted in new military tactics to address the complications inherent in these modern conflicts. The controversial use of targeted killing is amongst these new tactics. For the purposes of this discussion, targeted killing is the "intentional slaying of a specific alleged terrorist or group of alleged terrorists undertaken with explicit governmental approval where they cannot be arrested using reasonable means." [2] The inability to arrest suspected terrorists reflects the transnational aspect to these conflicts as the victim state is unable to exert enforcement jurisdiction beyond its borders. [3] Until such time as new international norms develop to specifically address targeted killing, the legality of this tactic must be assessed against existing IHL. Under contemporary IHL, targeted killing is lawful although highly circumscribed.

I: International Custom: its Statics and Dynamics -- Some Traditional Criteria of the Growth of International Custom -- The Law of the Continental Shelf in Theory -- II: The Continental Shelf, its Utilization and Control -- The Continental Shelf and its Riches -- National Shelf Policies -- Industrial Involvement on the Shelf -- The Shelf and the State -- Political and Industrial Limits of the Shelf -- III: Political and Legal Problems of the Continental Shelf: an Outline -- Political and Legal Aspects of the Doctrine: 1945 -- Conceptual Enlargement of the Shelf Doctrine: 1945–1958 -- The 1958 Conference on the Law of the Sea -- IV: Bilateral Perspectives of the Legal Regime of the Continental Shelf -- American and British Shelf Practice in the 1940's -- Coastal Right of Exclusive Control in Bilateral Perspectives -- Shelf Utilization and Responsibility of States: From Bilateral to Multilateral Perspectives -- Provisional Conclusions -- V: The Continental Shelf and International Custom: Assessment and Conclusions -- The Continental Shelf Regime -- International Custom: Aspects of Growth -- Selected Bibliography.

Situations of mass refugee influx represent by their very size and urgency daunting evidence of human suffering and cruelty. Consequently, the level and quality of refugee protection in times of crisis is tested. The choices to be made have to take into due consideration the prevalent conditions and restraints. They will probably always result in compromises. The question is whom or what the compromises are about? The focus in the present volume has been set on a detailed examination of some legal preconceptions commonly found in situations of mass refugee in-migration. The author concludes that situations when refugees arrive en masse do not, as a rule, qualify as a public emergency that threatens the life of the nation under contemporary international human rights law, and that mass expulsion of refugees as an emergency measure is prohibited at all times when this entails the risk of violating rights immune to derogation