Suchergebnisse

Persons detained for reasons related to an armed conflict are in a vulnerable position. Deprived of their liberty, they are at the mercy of their captors. Certain groups of detainees are particularly vulnerable. Additionally, the way in which non-international armed conflicts are fought can make it difficult for some parties to the conflict to comply with the rules benefiting particularly vulnerable detainees. This Article identifies groups of particularly vulnerable detainees and analyzes the general and special protections that are afforded to them under the conventional and customary international law of armed conflict. It then considers the realities of detention in armed conflict and sets out different ways in which these realities can be balanced with the importance of the protections for vulnerable groups. Finally, drawing on the law of international armed conflict, the Article considers how possibilities including the release and repatriation of particularly vulnerable detainees and the accommodation of such detainees in a third State could be implemented in a non-international armed conflict.

AbstractThis article considers the influence of teachings of publicists on the development of international law. The category of 'teachings of publicists' is not a homogeneous one. The article argues that it can be divided into: entities that have been empowered by States to conclude teachings, such as the International Law Commission; expert groups, such as the Institut de Droit International; and 'ordinary' publicists. The teachings of ordinary publicists are also of different types and include digests, treatises, textbooks, monographs, journal articles, and blog posts. Only by breaking down the category into its various types can the influence of the teaching of publicists on the development of international law be properly gauged. Even then, it can prove rather difficult to pin down the notion of 'influence'. Standard assessments of influence focus on the extent to which teachings are cited by courts and tribunals, in particular by the International Court of Justice. However, that approach privileges the role of courts and tribunals in the development of international law and overlooks the role of other actors. As such, the present article offers a different assessment of influence. It identifies the actors that comprise the community of international lawyers and analyses the various interactions that take place between these actors and the teachings of publicists. It is through this interaction, of which citation is but part, that the influence of the teachings of publicists can properly be determined.

This article analyses the changes in the law and practice of exclusion zones in the law of armed conflict at sea. It identifies three principal phases. First, it explores the exclusion zones of the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, which were modest in size and defensive in character. Second, it turns to the exclusion zones of the First World War and several subsequent conflicts. The exclusion zones of this period were fundamentally different to those of the Russo-Japanese war: if a vessel was within an exclusion zone, it was deemed susceptible to attack. The article then turns to the third phase of exclusion zone, which can be traced back to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (1994). The San Remo Manual separated out the establishment of the zone from its enforcement and specified that the same law applies within the zone as outside it. It also set out regulations for the zones should they be created. The practice of States is considered throughout.

AbstractFollowing a large-scale disaster, such as a major earthquake, tsunami or cyclone, tens of thousands of persons are often displaced, suffer from food shortages and in need of medical assistance. In situations in which the State affected by the disaster does not meet the needs of the affected persons itself, humanitarian assistance from outside the State might be required. This article considers the role of consent to external humanitarian assistance on the part of the affected State. As there is no single overarching treaty in the area of humanitarian assistance in situations of disaster, the article explores the role of consent in the various disaster-specific, subject-specific and region-specific treaties as well as in the soft law instruments in the area. Although the instruments take seemingly different approaches to the subject, a common standard is identified, namely that consent on the part of the affected State is required before external assistance can be provided but that consent cannot be arbitrarily withheld. The article then goes on to give content to the arbitrary withholding standard, breaking it down into its substantive and procedural elements. These include the meaning of the term 'arbitrary'; the requirement to provide a reason for the withholding of consent; legitimate grounds for withholding consent; and the actor that assesses the justification. Regard is had for State practice in the context of disasters as well as other areas of the law in which similar tests are used.

AbstractArmed groups frequently issue ad hoc commitments that contain a law of armed conflict component. These commitments detail the obligation of the relevant armed group to abide by international humanitarian law, the Geneva Conventions, or particular rules set out in the commitment. They commit the group to abide by international standards, sometimes exceed international standards, or in certain respects violate international standards. Although these commitments are often overlooked, they offer certain lessons for the law of armed conflict. This article considers the commitments of armed groups with respect to two specific areas of the law that are either of contested interpretation or seemingly inapplicable to non-international armed conflicts, namely the identification of legitimate targets and the prisoners of war regime.