Search results

Le présent ouvrage réunit les principaux experts du droit international humanitaire pour réfléchir sur ses principes fondateurs et leur pertinence dans les conflits armés contemporains. Il propose un état des lieux sur les grandes questions du droit international humanitaire à la lumière de l'évolution récente de la pratique en la matière. L'approche retenue par cette étude se veut à la fois didactique et critique, de manière à mieux comprendre les enjeux contemporains du droit international humanitaire, son évolution et sa portée. L'ouvrage collectif s'articule à cette fin autour de cinq

Introduction : post-conflict peacebuilding : ambiguity and identity / Vincent Chetail -- Capacity-building / Volker T(c)ơrk -- Civil-military interface / Thierry Tardy -- Civil society / Thania Paffenholz -- Conflict economies / Achim Wennmann -- Conflict transformation / Laurent Goetschel -- Democratic governance / Rama Mani and Jana Krause -- Disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration / Robert Muggah -- Free and fair elections / Victor-Yves Ghebali -- Human security / Keith Krause -- International crimes / Louise Doswald-Beck -- Local ownership / B(c)♭atrice Pouligny -- Mine action / Davide Orifici and Suzanne Damman -- Non-state actors / Andrew Clapham -- Peace operations / Nigel White -- Peace process / Bertrand G. Ramcharan -- Private sector / Gilles Carbonnier -- Reconciliation / Pierre Hazan -- Recovery / Riccardo Bocco, Pierre Harrisson, and Lucas Oesch -- Reparation / Marco Sassoli -- Responsibility to protect / Daniel Warner and Gilles Giacca -- Return and reintegration / Vicky Tennant -- Rule of law / Vera Gowlland-Debbas and Vassilis Pergantis -- Security sector reform / Heiner H(c)Þnggi -- State-building / Marwa Daoudy -- Transitional administration / Richard Caplan -- Transitional justice / Anne-Marie La Rosa and Xavier Philippe

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) epitomizes the potential and the limits of soft law in promoting global migration governance. While being a catalyst of multilateralism, the use of soft law remains highly ambiguous and must thus be approached with caution. At the same time, the GCM operates as a counter-narrative to populism insofar as it proposes a collaborative framework to develop global migration governance. Yet, its implementation record remains disappointing, and the last review carried out within the UN General Assembly signals a return of realpolitik. This calls for a vigilant plea toward a principled implementation of the GCM with due regard to the commitments of states contained therein, as well as to their legal duties under international law. Following this stance, soft law and hard law are not mutually exclusive, but rather mutually reinforcing, provided they are implemented in a cogent and integrated way. The GCM can make a difference on the ground if, and only if, it works in tandem with legally binding norms and instruments. If not, it may eventually become nothing else than a mere smokescreen, if not a masquerade, for the patent violations of migrants' rights.

This paper is assessing the legality of border closures decided by a vast number of countries with the view of limiting the spread of Covid-19. Although this issue has raised diverging interpretations in relation to International Health Regulations and regional free movement agreements, international human rights law provides a clear-cut answer: the rule of law stops neither at the border nor in times of emergency. Against this normative framework, border control can and must be carried out with the twofold purpose of protecting public health and individual rights, whereas border closure is unable to do so because it is by essence a collective and automatic denial of admission without any other form of process. This paper argues that blanket entry bans on the ground of public health are illegal under international human rights law. They cannot be reconciled with the most basic rights of migrants and refugees, including the principle of non-refoulement and access to asylum procedures, the prohibition of collective expulsion, the best interests of the child and the principle of non-discrimination. The paper concludes on the ways to better integrate at the borders public health and human rights imperatives in due respect with the rule of law. In both law and practice, public health and migrant's rights are not mutually exclusive. They can reinforce each other within a comprehensive human rights based approach to health and migration policies.