By Liesbeth Zegveld
Armed competition teams quite often struggle governments, looking overthrow and/or secession. yet who's liable lower than overseas legislations for the acts dedicated via those teams, or for the failure to avoid those acts? Zegveld examines the necessity legally to spot the events concerned whilst armed inner clash arises, and the truth in their call for for rights. even if at present such a lot armed conflicts are inner, they continue to be principally uncharted territory in legislation. This award-winning research may be of curiosity to teachers, postgraduate scholars and pros concerned with armed clash and diplomacy.
Read or Download Accountability of armed opposition groups in international law PDF
Best foreign & international law books
There's a regularly expressed view in Europe that the voters and the Member States are destined to be triumph over by means of the eu Union (EU). there's a experience that the european of at the present time isn't really what was once meant to be created or acceded to by way of the Member States or its electorate. The Outer Limits of ecu legislations brings jointly a various workforce of criminal students to think about facets of ecu substantial, constitutional, and procedural legislations in a way highlighting the numerous senses within which the ecu is or might be restricted and so demonstrating that the phobia of being triumph over is a fake worry.
Considers estate reparations from the viewpoint of constitutional justice, the guideline of legislations, but in addition from an id politics standpoint.
"This market-leading textbook offers an authoritative account of foreign legal legislations, and makes a speciality of what the scholar must be aware of - the crimes which are handled through overseas courts and tribunals in addition to the systems that police the research and prosecution of these crimes. The reader is guided via controversies with an available, but subtle method via the writer crew of 4 foreign legal professionals, with event either one of instructing the topic, and as negotiators on the origin of the foreign legal courtroom and the Rome convention.
- Global Inequality Matters (Global Ethics)
- The Law of War (LSE Monographs in International Studies)
- The Competence of the European Union in Copyright Lawmaking: A Normative Perspective of EU Powers for Copyright Harmonization
- Victims of International Crimes: An Interdisciplinary Discourse
Additional info for Accountability of armed opposition groups in international law
302–3 (16 November 1998) (hereafter, Celebici case). legal restraints on armed opposition groups as such 25 The Trial Chamber did thus not consider the difﬁculty of separate identiﬁcation of customary law to be prohibitive for its ﬁnding of customary law. At the same time, it failed to indicate how it circumvents this difﬁculty. The problem of disentanglement raises pertinent questions as to the reality of customary law identiﬁed by international bodies. Consider the following example, which provided, according to the Yugoslavia Tribunal, evidence of the customary law status of Common Article 3 and Protocol II: A more recent instance of this tendency [of the formation of customary law for internal armed conﬂicts] can be found in the stand taken in 1988 by the rebels (the FMLN) in El Salvador, when it became clear that the Government was not ready to apply the Protocol II it had previously ratiﬁed.
Rodley, and the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Bacre Waly Ndiaye, 16 January 1995) (hereafter, 1995 Joint Report of the Special Rapporteur on Question of Torture, and the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions); Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Colombia, 12 the normative gap This practice, demonstrating that armed opposition groups are bound by Common Article 3 and Protocol II,9 also shows that international bodies have assumed competence to determine the applicability of these norms in speciﬁc cases.
9, p. 1338. A/7720, para. 171 (Report of the Secretary General ‘Respect for Human Rights in Armed Conﬂicts’ 20 November 1969); see also S-S. Junod, Commentary Additional Protocols, see above n. 9, p. 1345. R. Baxter, ‘Jus in Bello Interno: the Present and Future Law’, in J. ), Law and Civil War in the Modern World ( Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1974), pp. 518, 527–8. Unlike Protocol II, Common Article 3 does not require armed opposition groups to exercise territorial control in order to be bound by the provisions set forth in this article, see below, Chapter 4, Section 1.
Accountability of armed opposition groups in international law by Liesbeth Zegveld