Suchergebnisse
Filter
120 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
Terrorism in the United States and Europe, 1800 - 1959: an annotated bibliography
In: Garland reference library of social science 449
Mass murder: an annotated bibliography
In: Garland reference library of social science 427
Disappearing Human Rights Defenders: Russia's Human Rights Violations and International Crimes in Ukraine
In: ABA Center for Human Rights Paper to the 2022 OSCE Human Dimensions Conference
SSRN
Absolutist Admissibility at the ICC: Revalidating Authentic Domestic Investigations
In: Israel Law Review 54(2) 2021, pp 143–173
SSRN
Observations of Professor Michael A. Newton on the Merits of the Legal Questions Presented by the Appeals Chamber in the Case of the Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda
In: Amicus Brief to the International Criminal Court Appeals Chamber, Prosecutor v. Ntaganda, No. ICC-01/04-02/06 A2, 2020
SSRN
Reframing the Proportionality Principle
Proportionality functions as oneof the most important legal constraints applicable to the conduct of hostilities. In that context, this short essay discusses the commonly encountered misapplications of Cicero's classic sentiment that "salus populwe supremus est lexl . . . silent enim leges inter armes." Rather than serving as a necessary basis for a positive articulation of lawful force as an exception to the norm, jus in bello proportionality delineates the outer boundaries of the commander's appropriate discretion. The mere invocation of jus in bello proportionality cannot become an effective extension of asymmetric combat power by artificially crippling combatant capabilities. This essay ends by framing the modern content of the proportionality principle that remains fully applicable as a matter of law even during in extremis situations.
BASE
Reframing the Proportionality Principle
Proportionality functions as one of the most important legal constraints applicable to the conduct of hostilities. In that context, this short essay discusses the commonly encountered misapplications of Cicero's classic sentiment that "salus populwe supremus est lex.silent enim leges inter armes." Rather than serving as a necessary basis for a positive articulation of lawful force as an exception to the norm, jus in bello proportionality delineates the outer boundaries of the commander's appropriate discretion. The mere invocation of jus in bello proportionality cannot become an effective extension of asymmetric combat power by artificially crippling combatant capabilities. This essay ends by framing the modern content of the proportionality principle that remains fully applicable as a matter of law even during in extremis situations.
BASE
Contorting Common Article 3
This short Essay describes the circularity of support between the ICRC and the Pre-Trial Chambers of the ICC. Its successive sections describe the problematic potential of extending the substantive coverage of Common Article 3 to encompass members of the same armed group who commit criminal acts against one another.' In particular, the Revised Commentary fails to address the due process ramifications of an enlarged Common Article 3, even as the development of the text documented by the readily available negotiating record warrants an alternative understanding. Lastly, the ICRC position could indicate a radical shift in the very design of the field of international humanitarian law.2 This Essay closes by restating the imperative balance between military pragmatism and humanitarian imperatives that are preserved by the careful blending of values within the laws and customs of warfare. While wholly appealing on humanitarian grounds, particularly on the facts presented in Ntaganda, the reconceived approach to Common Article 3 may well endanger the larger structure of international humanitarian law. The Revised ICRC Commentary omits any mention of these competing concerns.
BASE
An Assessment of the Legality of Arms Sales to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in the Context of the Conflict in Yemen
In: Vanderbilt Law Research Paper No. 17-26
SSRN
Working paper
Back to the Future
This essay refocuses the debate over autonomous weapons systems to consider the potentially salutary effects of the evolving technology. Law does not exist in a vacuum and cannot evolve in the abstract. Jus in bello norms should be developed in light of the overarching humanitarian goals, particularly since such weapons are not inherently unlawful or unethical in all circumstances. This essay considers whether a preemptive ban on autonomous weapons systems is likely to be effective and enforceable. It examines the grounds potentially justifying a preemptive ban, concluding that there is little evidence that such a ban would advance humanitarian goals because of a foreseeable lack of complete adherence. The essay concludes by suggesting three affirmative values that would be served by fully vetted and field-tested technological advances represented by autonomous weapons. Properly developed and deployed, autonomous weapons might well advance the core purposes of jus in bello by helping the balance the twin imperatives of military necessity and humanitarian interests
BASE
How the International Criminal Court Threatens Treaty Norms
In: Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 49, (2016, Forthcoming)
SSRN
A Synthesis of Community Based Justice and Complementarity
In: CONTESTED JUSTICE: THE POLITICS AND PRACTICE OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT INTERVENTIONS, Carsten Stahn, et. al., eds.,Cambridge University Press, 2016
SSRN
Charging War Crimes: Policy & Prognosis from a Military Perspective
In: The Law and Practice of the International Criminal Court: A Critical Account of Challenges and Achievements, Chapter 29, Carsten Stahn, ed,. Oxford University Press, 2014, Forthcoming
SSRN