Suchergebnisse

If thinking about weapons, one generally thinks about lethal technology. However, an abundance of so-called non-lethal weapons, a technology not aimed at killing but merely incapacitating the human target or military objective, is also being deployed both within and outside the ambit of armed conflict. Since non-lethal weapons do not necessarily implicate a zero chance of mortality, but often lead to severe wounds and tremendous suffering, the use and deployment of such weapons raise strong humanitarian and human rights concerns. The prohibition to cause superfluous injuries and unnecessary suffering, as well as the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks are, amongst others, one of the most relevant provisions potentially having an influence on the deployment of nonlethal technology in armed conflict. However, the invocation of the principle of proportionality may lead to the justification of the use of non-lethal weapons on the grounds that the military advantage anticipated was greater than the human suffering caused. Insofar, one must ask whether there is a "red-line"; where the almost inflationary invocation of the principle of proportionality may defeat the object and purpose of the Geneva Conventions and therefore render the deployment and use of non-lethal technology illegal. Apart from the battlefield, non-lethal weapons are also being deployed in lawenforcement scenarios, where human rights law plays a pivotal role. In this regard, one must not look merely at the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading suffering and the right to life but also at the right to health, a presumably underestimated principle curbing and shaping the use of non-lethal technology outside the ambit of armed conflict. ; Kada se govori o oružju, obično se pod njime podrazumijeva primjena smrtonosne tehnologije. S druge strane, u i izvan oružanih sukoba, često se koristi i tzv. nesmrtonosno oružje, kojemu svrha nije ubijanje, već oneposobljavanje pojedinaca ili vojnih ciljeva. Budući da nesmrtonosno oružje ne mora nužno uzrokovati smrt, ali uzrokuje ozbiljna ranjavanja i velike patnje, korištenje takvih sredstava otvara brojna humanitarna pitanja i pitanja zaštite ljudskih prava. Zabrana uzrokovanja suvišnih ozljeda i nepotrebne patnje, kao i zabrana neselektivnih napada su jedne od najznačajnijih zabrana u međunarodnom ratnom pravu, a koje se mogu primijeniti i na korištenje nesmrtonosnog oružja u oružanom sukobu. Međutim, primjena načela razmjernosti može dovesti do opravdavanja korištenja nesmrtonosnog oružja. To se opravdava očekivanim prednostima njegove primjene u oružanom sukobu, koje pretežu u odnosu na uzrokovane ljudske patnje. Stoga se postavlja pitanje postoji li "crvena linija" njegove primjene. Učestalo pozivanje na primjenu načela razmjernosti može poništiti cilj i svrhu Ženevskih konvencija te dovesti do opravdavanja nezakonitog korištenja nesmrtonosnog oružja. Osim u oružanim sukobima, nesmrtonosno se oružje može koristiti i u policijskim postupanjima. U tim slučajevima osobito značenje ima zaštita ljudskih prava. Pri tomu se u obzir ne smije uzeti samo zabrana mučenja i uzrokovanja nečovječnih ili ponižavajućih patnji te pravo na život, već i pravo na zdravlje. Pravo na zdravlje ograničava i postavlja granice uporabe nesmrtonosnog oružja izvan okvira oružanog sukoba.

Das Zeitalter der Marktwirtschaft erfordert die Etablierung geeigneter Kartellgesetze und der Schaffung von Wettbewerb. Im Rahmen der Globalisierung hat man sich die Frage zu stellen, welche völkerrechtlichen Herausforderungen in Bezug auf kartellrechtliche Sachverhalte mit Auslandsbezug bestehen und wie diese bestmöglich gehandhabt werden können. Im Rahmen dieser Arbeit wurden zunächst unilaterale Maßnahmen der Kartellrechtserstreckung bei Sachverhalten mit Auslandsbezug einer völkerrechtlichen Analyse unterworfen und insbesondere die Perspektive der Entwicklungsländer und der Zivilgesellschaft einer näheren Betrachtung unterzogen. Bilaterale Maßnahmen in Form von rechtlich verbindlichen Kooperationsvereinbarungen wie auch nicht verbindliche soft law Instrumente versuchen den Problemen einseitiger Maßnahmen bei der Handhabe kartellrechtlicher Sachverhalte mit Auslandsbezug Einhalt zu gebieten. Durch die Förderung von technical assistance und capacity building wird versucht, die Etablierung effizienter Kartellrechtssysteme in Entwicklungsländern zu unterstützen. Im Gegensatz dazu bieten multilaterale Ansätze die Möglichkeit, einen umfassenden Regelungskatalog eines globalen Wettbewerbsrechts zu errichten. Bislang gibt es jedoch ausschließlich soft law Instrumente und kein verbindliches Vertragswerk. Zahlreiche Autoren haben trotzdem die Ideen eines multilateralen Vertragswerkes wieder aufgegriffen. Fox, Drexl und Basedow unterbreiten ein nach konstitutionalistischen Gesichtspunkten orientiertes Konzept, während Petersmann bei seinen Vorschlägen die Einbettung der WTO in das Völkerrechtsregime im Allgemeinen berücksichtigt und sowohl die Beachtung der Entwicklungsländer als auch der Zivilgesellschaft vorwiegend aus einer menschenrechtlichen und demokratiepolitischen Betrachtungsweise propagiert. Der eigene Vorschlag lehnt sich an das Konzept von Petersmann an, versucht aber auch andere Gesichtspunkte in die rechtliche Analyse miteinzubeziehen. ; In the age of market economy, the establishment of adequate competition laws and the creation of competition itself have never been more important. In the course of globalization especially competition cases with foreign elements evoke tremendous legal challenges. Within the scope of this paper, those legal challenges are being carefully analyzed, primarily in the context of international law. At the unilateral level the extraterritorial application of competition laws, the role of developing countries, civil society and individuals in general, are in the focus of research. Bilateral mechanisms, such as non binding soft law instruments but also binding cooperation agreements try to counteract existing problems at the purely unilateral level. By the promotion of competition advocacy, technical assistance and capacity building developing countries should be fostered to eract efficient competition laws and market economy. On the contrary, mulitlateral approaches try to overcome problems arising at the bilateral level, within a much broader context. So far, only non binding soft law instruments exist. Nonetheless, many legal scholars made fruitful proposals for a possible future multilateral competition agreement, like a world competition law and the establishment of the ICPO. Fox, Drexl and Basedow recommend the establishment of a multilateral agreement with WTO specific constiutionalist principles. Petersmann takes in consideration the role of the WTO within the global international law regime and calls for an enhanced regard of developing countries? needs and the integration of civil society within a possible future competition law agreement. The author?s own proposal refers to Petersmann?s proposal of a possible competition law agreement at the mulitlateral level but tries to take in consideration additional aspects which have not been mentioned so far. ; von Elisabeth Hoffberger ; Abweichender Titel laut Übersetzung der Verfasserin/des Verfassers ; Graz, Univ., Dipl.-Arb., 2012 ; (VLID)224543