Suchergebnisse

Half Title -- Series Information -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- Chapter 1 Introduction -- 1 Ban the Bot? -- 2 Historical Visions of Autonomy -- 3 Responsibility for Autonomous Weapon Systems -- Chapter 2 Development of Autonomy in Weapon Systems -- 1 The History of Automation in Weapon Systems -- 2 Weapon Systems Currently in Use -- 2.1 Mines -- 2.2 Missile Defence Systems -- 2.3 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles -- 2.4 Unmanned Ground Vehicles -- 2.5 Cyber Weapons -- 2.6 Loitering Munitions -- 3 Likely Future Developments -- 4 Reasons for the March towards Autonomy -- 5 Programming -- 5.1 Machine Learning -- 5.2 Artificial Intelligence -- 5.3 'Strong' AI -- 5.4 Ethical Governor -- 5.5 Bounded Morality -- Chapter 3 Meaning of Autonomy -- 1 General Notions of Autonomy -- 1.1 Autonomy in Philosophy -- 1.2 Autonomy in Technical Discussions -- 2 Autonomy Spectra -- 3 Dimensions of Autonomy in Autonomous Systems -- 3.1 Human-Machine Relation -- 3.2 Sophistication of the Machine -- 3.3 The Type of Decision Being Automated -- 4 Conclusion -- Chapter 4 The Why of International Criminal Justice -- 1 The History of Individual Criminal Accountability in International Criminal Justice -- 2 The Proposed Reasons for International Criminal Justice -- 2.1 Retribution -- 2.2 Deterrence -- 2.3 Truth-Telling -- 2.4 Providing Justice for Victims -- 2.5 Facilitation of Peace -- 2.6 The Expressive Effect of International Criminal Justice -- 3 Conclusion -- Chapter 5 AWS Considered as Prohibited Weapons -- 1 Introduction -- 2 Weapons Law under International Humanitarian Law -- 2.1 Superfluous Injury or Unnecessary Suffering -- 2.1.1 Introduction -- 2.1.2 History -- 2.1.3 What Is the Correct English Wording? -- 2.1.4 What Suffering Is Superfluous or What Injury Is Unnecessary? -- 2.1.5 Conclusion -- 2.2 Inherently Indiscriminate -- 2.2.1 Introduction.

Abstract
The national implementation of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) has long been a point of discussion. One aspect of this national implementation concerns the enactment of penal legislation addressing the prohibitions of the BWC. There has been a clear increase in the past 18 years of penal legislation addressing biological weapons. This coincides with the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1540. Through a comprehensive assessment of the adopted national legislation it is possible to see trends and consider the extent to which such legislation seeks to address the BWC or Resolution 1540. The assessment clearly indicates that there is a divergence between the legislation addressing biological weapons in a general manner and legislation specifically seeking to address biological weapons in a terrorism context. This analysis will recognize potential avenues to increase national implementation of the BWC by looking at the progress made in the context of Resolution 1540.

Twenty years after the adoption of the Rome Statute questions concerning complementarity remain. There is no clear indication as to how international involvement would influence the admissibility of a case. One of the responses to human rights violations and possible international crimes that has risen to prominence in the past decades is fact-finding mandated by UN organs. At the same time these mechanisms have started to incorporate a focus on issues of international criminal law and individual criminal responsibility. As these mechanisms are starting to attempt to resemble a criminal investigation in some regards the question starts to rise as to what effect an international fact-finding mechanism can have on the admissibility of a case before the International Criminal Court. This article explains how these mechanisms need to be viewed in the context of the complementarity-regime of the Rome Statute.