Search

BACKGROUND: This study explores the impacts of attacks perpetrated in the context of armed conflict, to female health workers in three Colombian territories. METHODS: We conducted a document review of the reports and databases of the Colombian Truth Commission, 17 in-depth semi-structured interviews with experts on the national and regional armed conflict and the medical mission, and 26 female health workers who were victims of attacks. RESULTS: Experts and female health workers reported attacks to health activities, facilities, equipment, and personnel, including attacks to traditional doctors belonging to indigenous communities. The most frequent attacks were threats and retention of health personnel; theft of supplies and medicines; damage and use of infrastructure and means of transport for purposes other than health care; and hinderance of health service provision. The attacks occurred in a framework of structural violence that intersects with poverty, racism, and gender bias. The impacts of these attacks include gender-based violence, significant disruption of the lives of health workers, and physical, emotional, psychological, social, and economic effects on the victims and their families. The government response to protect victims and populations has been absent or insufficient. CONCLUSIONS: Attacks to health care were reported in all the studied territories obstructing adequate health care. Impacts of these attacks affect negatively the professional and personal life of the workers and are aggravated by structural violence and absent or little institutional response.

The article is devoted to the analysis of the provisions of international human rights law and international humanitarian law regarding the protection of the right to property, in particular the permitted limitations of this right, the relevant practice of international human rights courts and international criminal tribunals, the connection between the institution of derogation and the law of armed conflicts, as well as problematic issues of the protection of the right to property damaged during the russian-Ukrainian armed conflict. The author considers the provisions of some international treaties, which provide for the protection of the right to own property in peacetime, as well as the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights related to the violation of the right of applicants to own their property in accordance with Protocol No. 1 to the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in connection with an international armed conflict or a situation of occupation. The author also analyzes the provisions of some sources of international humanitarian law regarding property as an object that must be protected during armed conflicts, in particular in occupied territories, and also provides examples of cases of international criminal tribunals, in whose decisions the destruction of property was recognized as a component of crimes against humanity. The author examines the question of the relationship between the sources of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in the context of the protection of the right to peaceful possession of property. The peculiarities of the institution of derogation in the context of the right to property in the conditions of an international armed conflict are analyzed. Ukraine's derogation from its obligations under international human rights treaties, including the right to peaceful possession of property, in the conditions of russian armed aggression, is studied. In addition, in the context of the armed conflict between Ukraine and russia, the objects of property rights and the interested subjects of the right to property, which is violated or limited as a result of military operation, are singled out, and the collective dimension of the right to property, which was damaged during the russian-Ukrainian armed conflict, was investigated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Colombia has experienced decades of conflict between the government and non-state actors. Attacks on healthcare have been a grave but regular facet of that violence. In response, the Misión Médica (MM) program was developed to support, protect, and defend healthcare. Sporadic violence continues, with many recent attacks perpetrated not by armed actors but by residents. Given the history of conflict and ongoing violence, we sought to capture the perspectives of both healthcare workers (HCWs) and community members (CMs) regarding the characteristics and impacts of attacks on health in Colombia to gain insight into how to better prevent violence and mitigate its impacts. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from January to March 2021 in seven departments in Colombia in regions that witnessed attacks on healthcare. Questionnaires were administered to HCWs and CMs via purposive sampling, probing their experiences with attacks on health with both closed and open-ended questions. The categorical responses were stratified by health worker vs. non-health worker and descriptively analyzed. Narrative responses were analyzed via a hybrid deductive/inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: Seventy-three individuals participated in the study (36 HCWs and 37 cm). Approximately 77% of HCWs believed that attacks on healthcare impacted health outcomes while 68% of CMs did not see a direct connection between violence against healthcare and poor health outcomes. Awareness of the MM program was significantly different between HCWs (83.3%) and CMs (37.8%). The survey responses explored the characteristics of attacks on health, compounded impacts of violence on the health system, personal impacts, and perspectives on mitigation efforts. CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrates that: (1) attacks on healthcare are context-dependent and require a local lens for mitigation and management; (2) both HCWs and CMs have critical perspectives that must be considered, (3) the impacts of violence against healthcare are complex and compounded and (4) that awareness of the legal protections of the Geneva Conventions must be combined with education on the health impacts for robust protection strategies. Critically, Both CMs and HCWs experience fear and psychosocial ramifications of these attacks, suggesting the need for stronger protections and resources to support the health workforce and the local community.

The article is aimed at highlighting the issue of existing ways of compensation for victims of military conflict. It is stated that international law requires violating States to take appropriate measures to compensate for the damage caused directly by their actions or by the actions of persons acting on their orders. The author establishes that the beneficiaries of reparation for violations of IHL are the persons who have been victims or suffered as a result of such violations, namely: civilians, prisoners of war, family members and relatives of victims, and the State. The author provides options for filing claims for compensation for damage caused as a result of war: appeals to national courts, courts of foreign countries, the European Court of Human Rights, the International Court of Justice, investment arbitration, specially created funds or commissions. It is emphasised that currently there is no universal mechanism for compensation for damage caused by Russia’s armed aggression against Ukraine. However, the most realistic mechanism for Ukraine is the established international compensation mechanism, which aims to compensate for damage and losses caused by the Russian Federation and provides for the possibility of compensation for various types of losses - from destruction and damage to property to damage due to loss of control over property. It is concluded that: the importance of compensation is significant, especially in the context of IHL, as people who have been victims of armed conflict face long-term consequences affecting their health, earning potential and overall stability of life; an important element of reparation and one of the guarantees of its implementation in practice is the collection and documentation of a high-quality evidence base of the damage caused both in civil and criminal proceedings; the main indicator for choosing a particular mechanism of reparation is its effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the analysis of the institute of control in international law as one of the elements for attributing the behaviour of a separatist entity or other anti-governmental organisation to the state in the process of bringing the latter to international legal responsibility for internationally wrongful acts, primarily massive human rights violations. The author emphasises the growing importance of the issue of control in the context of modern armed conflicts, where ‘proxy’ forces are increasingly used, acting formally independently but in fact controlled by states. This raises new challenges for international law, especially in the area of human rights protection, including during armed conflicts, and State responsibility. The article examines the provisions of some international instruments relating to the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts, and in particular those provisions which provide for attribution of conduct of individuals or groups of individuals acting ‘at the direction’, or ‘under the direction’, or ‘under the control’ of the State. The article discusses three main concepts of control, namely: strict control, effective control and general control. The authors analyse in detail the history of the emergence and development of each concept, as well as explain the main differences between them, and reveal their strengths and weaknesses. It is argued that strict control requires complete dependence of the organisation on the state, while effective control allows for autonomy of the organisation, but requires a certain influence of the state on its actions. Overall control emphasises the importance of structured interaction between the state and the group. The authors provide examples of the application of these concepts in the practice of international justice bodies, including the International Court of Justice, the European Court of Human Rights, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, highlighting the difference in approaches to assessing control and responsibility of states. These examples demonstrate the difficulty of proving a certain level of control, which affects the resolution of disputes in international courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The global landscape, enshrined in a wide range of international legal agreements, envisions an era of peaceful coexistence among nations. This vision is based on fundamental legal acts, such as the Charter of the United Nations and the Statute of the International Court of Justice (dated 26.06.1945), which enshrine the principle of peaceful coexistence. In addition, the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States (24.10.1970) and the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (01.08.1975) build on this foundation, strengthening the doctrine of peaceful interaction between states. The United Nations Charter resonates as a clear call to nations to prioritize peace and diplomacy over confrontation. The provision that “all Members of the United Nations shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner as not to endanger international peace, security and justice” (Article 2(3)) is not just a statement of intent; it is a guiding principle that emphasizes the value of peaceful coexistence. This principle favors dialogue over discord, cooperation over confrontation, and understanding over unilateral action. However, the development of international relations from the mid-20th century to the beginning of the 21st century demonstrates a somewhat opposite dynamic. Despite these well-established doctrines, there have been many instances where disputes have escalated into armed conflicts. The Korean War, the Vietnam War, multiple conflicts in the Middle East, and the recent civil war in Syria are just a few examples that have left a deep mark on the structure of world relations. Such events demonstrate the unfortunate tendency of states or groups within states to resort to force or the threat of force as a means of resolving disputes. This departure from the established norm of peaceful settlement raises a number of pressing questions and concerns, especially within the framework of international humanitarian law. How to accurately define “armed conflict”? What distinguishes an international conflict from a non-international one? When delving into this sub-topic, it is very important to distinguish between different classifications of conflicts. A thorough understanding of the criteria that distinguish, for example, between international conflicts, internal unrest, and other types of hostilities is of paramount importance. Referring to these criteria not only helps to accurately categorize conflicts, but also ensures that appropriate legal mechanisms are applied to mitigate the humanitarian consequences of such events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The atrocities of Israel's aggression perpetrated from 07 October 2023 on the civilian population and the treatment of prisoners of war shocked the world. Western governments have encouraged Israel to continue its tyranny. Many other governments around the world preferred to remain silent despite the presence of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This has led to a re-launch of the debate on the credibility of IHL and the positioning of International Islamic Humanitarian Law (IIHL) on the world stage. The aim of this study is therefore to compare IHL and IIHL, from a theoretical and practical point of view, in the field of the protection of civilians during war and the treatment of prisoners of war. To do this, we opted for a comparative approach between these two components, both conceptually and functionally. This approach focused, on the one hand, on the main sources of the Sharia, the Quran and the Sunnah, as well as on the opinions of Muslim scholars (ulamas), supported by concrete examples of the application of Islamic norms by the Prophet and the Rashidoun caliphs. On the other hand, it also examined all the conventions, treaties and other documents that constitute the sources of the IHL. From a theoretical point of view, the results showed that there are many similarities between the two laws. In practical terms, however, the IIHL stands out for its concrete form and effective application. These observations led us to recommend that the current world order be rethought in view of the juxtaposition of the IIHL and IHL rules.

The results of the monitoring of the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine regarding compliance with the labor rights of persons with the status of persons who have disappeared under special circumstances are presented. The actuality of the topic is due to the fact that ensuring compliance with the constitutional rights of citizens, primarily citizens who need additional social protection, is a priority of the state. Attention was drawn to the fact that the observance of such rights, especially in the conditions of martial law, is an important aspect of state policy. The purpose of the article is to analyze the legislation regulating compliance with the labor rights of civilian employees who are missing due to military aggression by the russian federation. Achieving the outlined goal became possible thanks to the use of a complex of methods of scientific knowledge: dialectical, comparative-legal, formal-logical, systemic-structural. On the basis of the conducted analysis, it was established that the legal norms that guarantee the preservation of the labor rights of the investigated category of employees are imperfect, which prevents the proper realization of the constitutionally guaranteed labor rights of employees who are missing. It has been established that there are different approaches to ensuring the labor rights of civilian employees depending on the position. It was established that the absence of a clear list of persons authorized to perform state functions makes it impossible to determine a complete list of such persons. The role of the Ombudsman of Ukraine in observing the labor rights of the specified category of persons is emphasized. The imperfection of the mechanism of informing the owner of the Register of missing persons of the employer about the acquisition of such a status by the person was noted. It has been established that in the absence of a missing person, the employer is unable to pay wages to the relatives of the missing person, and there is no order among relatives in the possibility of receiving wages. On the basis of the conducted research, conclusions were formulated regarding the gaps in the legislation, which lead to the violation of the labor rights of the specified category of citizens. On the basis of the received conclusions, in the future, proposals for normative legal acts may be formulated with the aim of restoring the violated constitutional rights of the missing persons, as well as their family members and relatives.

The enduring conflicts among Middle Eastern nations have caused devastating casualties and loss of life, leading to deep human suffering and significant societal distress. Their impact is not limited to the immediate regions involved but has reverberated across communities within those countries. Additionally, the international community has been deeply affected by the conflict and has made efforts to seek a resolution. The inadequate understanding of collateral damage and a primitive mindset have resulted in the unfortunate deaths of numerous innocent civilians. This article explores the psychological mechanisms underlying collateral damage in the context of war and conflict. In an effort to shed light on the multifaceted nature of collateral damage and its impact on both affected populations and combatants, the complex interplay of cognitive, emotional, and social factors was explored. The aim was to explore the psychological consequences of collateral damage and provide theoretical assumptions to understand collateral damage and war. The SANRA narrative review method was adopted to discuss the psychological underpinnings of collateral damage. Several studies have explored the concept of collateral damage in the context of war and psychology. By understanding the psychological mechanisms behind collateral damage, it is possible to effectively address the root causes and develop strategies to minimise its occurrence in armed conflicts. Moreover, it is essential to prioritise the education of leaders and military personnel regarding the concept of collateral damage

Using the development of the last decade of the current century as a temporal reference point, this study tackles the urgent task of understanding and promoting an effective implementation of IHL (International Humanitarian Law) within the context of the armed conflict in the Colombian Caribbean region. Based on this analysis, there's an identified need for a harmonious approach grounded in participatory premises, considering both local residents and actors directly involved in the conflict. It's worth noting that this analysis particularly highlights the case of the Gulf Clan as an example. Employing a primarily qualitative methodology, in line with its nature, this study aims to provide a refreshed and contextual perspective that can guide future research and public policies in the realms of IHL. Consistent with its objectives, the importance of refining methodologies given the ever-changing nature of conflicts in the region is emphasized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article addresses the study of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as a hypothetical court of human rights. Two questions guide the theoretical reflection and aim of this study: first, can the activities of the Court be viewed through the paradigm of human rights, and second, can the ICJ be considered a functional court of human rights? To answer these questions, the broad concept of a "court of human rights" is used, which refers to an institutionalized judicial mechanism intended to take necessary legal measures to record relevant human rights violations and to protect and restore such rights, regardless of who may be the claimant in such a case (a state or a person). The study demonstrates that it is appropriate to consider the activities of the ICJ through the paradigm of human rights, as evidenced by the Court's jurisprudence and numerous academic studies in the West. However, after analyzing the relevant arguments and counterarguments, the assumption that the Court can be regarded as a court of human rights is refuted. While many human rights conventions assign a special role to the ICJ in resolving disputes, human rights have never been the sole object of dispute in these proceedings; instead, they have always been part of an interstate dispute. Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly shown an ambiguous attitude towards methods of recording violations of human rights conventions, fact-finding methodology in such cases, and criteria for compensating victims of such violations, which has not contributed to the protection of human rights in relevant cases. The article also emphasizes the importance of the human factor in shaping the Court's jurisprudence and expresses hope for an evolution of quality in the ICJ's treatment of human rights, should a majority of judges adopt a human-centred approach to international law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Article dedicated to investigating the object of the composition of a criminal offense of violation of the laws and customs of war. The relevance of the topic is determined by the increase in violations of international humanitarian law in contemporary armed conflicts, including in the context of Russian aggression against Ukraine. The author analyses various approaches to defining the concept of "object of criminal offense," critically assessing the traditional Soviet notion of the object as social relations. The need to move away from this concept in favour of a broader understanding of the object as a complex of socially significant values, interests, and goods protected by criminal law is substantiated. The article discusses the specificity of the object of violations of the laws and customs of war, as defined by international acts regulating the conduct of war. The author emphasizes that this object includes the international legal order in the sphere of armed conflicts, the principles of international humanitarian law, rules of conduct of hostilities, and the protection of war victims. An additional optional object of violation of the laws and customs of war analysed is the life and health of the person. It is emphasized that a mandatory feature of the object for this criminal offense is its subject matter, which constitutes objects of civilian purpose, including national property, which serves as a material carrier of cultural values. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the structure of criminal offenses against peace, security of humanity, and international order, which differs from the traditional structure of a criminal offense and includes material, mental, and contextual elements. The author also examines the concept of command responsibility, which is an important component of criminal responsibility for violations of the laws and customs of war. The conclusions assert that a clear understanding of the object of violations of the laws and customs of war is crucial for the correct qualification of actions and ensuring the inevitability of punishment for criminal offenses against peace, security of humanity, and international order. The author emphasizes the need for further improvement of approaches to defining the object of this criminal offense considering the development of international criminal law and the practice of international judicial institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article emphasizes that protecting the rights and interests of children is the most important task of any democratic state. International human rights law and international humanitarian law regulate the rights of children and their protection, as well as the respective obligations of states and non-state institutions in this area. The universally recognized mechanism for the protection of children's rights remains almost unchanged, but in the conditions of martial law, new circumstances arise in which children's rights may be violated, especially the right to protection from violence and ill-treatment. The main violations of children's rights are: recruitment of children, use of prohibited weapons to wage war, obstruction in the provision of humanitarian aid, deprivation of citizenship, illegal deportation of children, murder and mutilation, damage to health care facilities, educational institutions, which leads to the impossibility of realizing the rights of the latter. The article describes the peculiarities of the legal regulation of the status of a child who suffered as a result of hostilities and armed conflicts. The legislation of Ukraine does not contain a uniform approach to the protection of children during the violation of certain types of rights and freedoms. In addition, some of the existing guarantees have no practical application due to the lack of a mechanism for their implementation or inconsistency with the realities of today. The international community, together with Ukraine, implemented a mechanism to protect and restore the rights of Ukrainian children. The violated rights of children during a full-scale invasion must be protected and restored through both national and international institutions. In this context, the Children of War platform created in Ukraine plays an important role. This is the only platform that collects information about children affected by war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Public & Private International Law Bulletin is the property of Public & Private International Law Bulletin and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper offers a summary of a discussion on the definition of a vulnerable witness, a subject extensively explored by the author in her book 'The Vulnerable Witness in the Practice of International and Hybrid Courts.' While the paper specifically addresses trauma as a factor in determining witness vulnerability, the book encompasses a wider examination of various factors that contribute to the classification of a witness as vulnerable. Despite the frequent use of the term 'vulnerable witness', a clear and comprehensive understanding of its scope remains elusive. The discretion exercised by legal practitioners, especially judges, prosecutors, and investigators, in deciding whether to classify a witness as vulnerable, elicits concerns regarding the justice system's capacity to meet the genuine needs of these individuals. There is a risk that the incorrect use of mechanisms intended for this group may compromise their welfare. Very often, it is precisely these witnesses who are pivotal in ascertaining the truth, owing to their direct knowledge of the facts concerning the events being investigated. Given the international community's recognition of the threat to vulnerable witnesses and the need for special protection, this paper contributes to the discourse by examining key elements critical to the effective treatment of vulnerable witnesses in the context of criminal proceedings involving violations of international humanitarian law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This post analyses the separation between jus ad bellum / in bello as arising from the Advisory Opinion of the ICJ. This separation was challenged by many States appearing before the Court, some of which implied that Israel’s policies and practices, as violations of jus in bello, rendered the occupation unlawful under jus ad bellum. The Court ultimately reaffirmed the separation with a twofold argument, namely qualifying the ‘legality of the occupation’ as a jus ad bellum question, and framing Israel’s policies and practices (prolonged occupation, annexation, and settlement policy) as violations of jus ad bellum.

This contribution discusses three possible rationales for the Court’s rejection of the relevance of Israel’s security concerns: Lack of proof of serious and legitimate security concerns by Israel, the insufficiency of broad security concerns to justify the continued use of force, and the insufficiency of broad security concerns to deny realization of Palestinian self-determination. As long as international law doctrine on the duty to end a belligerent occupation despite the prevalence of serious security concerns remains contested, and as long as security conditions in the region remain extremely unstable, it is unlikely that a withdrawal will be deemed practicable

It is no understatement to say that the 19 July 2024 ICJ Advisory Opinion constitutes a seismic change in the international law and practice on the question of Palestine. In one fell swoop, the ICJ has shifted what was hitherto an almost exclusive focus of the international community on how Israel has administered its 57-year occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territory under International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, to the requirement that Israel end its occupation of that territory as “rapidly as possible”.

The conflict between Israel and Palestine, or more accurately, between the two Peoples, has persisted for over a century. A tragic reminder of the unbearable costs of this conflict is the deadly October 7 attack by Hamas on Israel, and the ensuing war, which has led to horrific consequences, with thousands of Israelis and Palestinians killed, many severely injured, and extensive damage to the civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. In these circumstances, an important question arises: what role should international law and international tribunals play in mitigating the grave harm to all those involved in the conflict?

The Ukrainian legislator’s differentiation of criminal liability for certain manifestations of collaboration has led to unjustified competition and considerable difficulties in qualifying the relevant unlawful acts. The purpose of this study was to analyse the specific features of criminal liability for aiding and abetting the aggressor state in the national and international dimensions. To complete the tasks of this study, a set of scientific methods was employed: dogmatic – in the analysis of legal constructions of elements of collaboration and abetting the aggressor state; comparative legal – in the context of comparing the rules on liability for collaboration and the rules of international humanitarian law. The study showed that Ukrainian criminal law theory and court practice have not developed consistent approaches to the application of the rules on liability for collaboration. The study focused on the fact that the criminal legislation of Ukraine applies an approach whereby certain types of economic collaboration are factually identified with military collaboration, which does not follow international humanitarian law. It was concluded that when qualifying the transfer of material resources to representatives of the aggressor state, there is a competition between the provisions of Part 4 of Article 111- 1 and Article 111-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In such a situation, it is reasonable to apply the rule on liability for collaboration. It was found that the payment of taxes, fees, and other mandatory payments to the Russian budget of any level, made in the occupied territory of Ukraine by a citizen of Ukraine, a foreigner, a stateless person for themselves and/or in the interests of legal entities registered in the territory of the Russian Federation cannot be covered by the objective side of abetting the aggressor state, as it does not follow international humanitarian law and does not contain such a feature as voluntariness, which is a mandatory feature of the crime under Article 111-2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The practical significance of this study lies in defining certain rules for qualifying aiding and abetting the aggressor state which may be used by pre-trial investigation authorities in the legal assessment of such behaviour

The relevance of this study lies in the need to understand the interaction between conventional law and the circumstances of society in wartime, especially in the context of modern conflicts. The purpose of this study was to identify this interaction and determine its impact on the current legal environment. To fulfil this purpose, various research methods were employed, including literature review, document analysis, empirical research, comparative analysis, and expert evaluation. These methods helped to systematise information and carry out a reasoned analysis of the interaction between legal norms and the circumstances of modern society in the context of military operations. The findings of this study show that the problem of implementing conventional law in the context of armed conflict is caused not only by different interpretations of its provisions, but also by systematic violations of international humanitarian law by the parties to the conflict. It is noted that some of these violations may be the result of a lack of clarity or contradictions in the texts of the conventions, as well as differences in national legislation. Specific examples were considered in the context of different types of conflicts, including armed conflicts and situations of occupation, where systematic violations of human rights and humanitarian standards are recorded. Specifically, the study investigated the attitude towards civilians, the circumstances of warfare, the treatment of prisoners of war, the provision of medical care in the conflict zone, humanitarian aid, access to education and food. The study also examined the manipulation of information and the legal framework by Russia. In view of the identified difficulties in implementing conventional law, the study proposed concrete ways to improve the international legal mechanism, namely by clarifying and harmonising the rules of international humanitarian law, ensuring more effective monitoring and accountability for violations, and engaging in dialogue with all stakeholders, neutral observers and partner countries to jointly find solutions. This allows formulating recommendations for international organisations, states, and human rights groups on further measures to ensure compliance with conventional law in the context of armed conflict and improve human rights protection

Despite the fact that there is a trend in understanding international humanitarian law and international human rights law as two separated branches of international law, discussions about these two concepts and their relationship continues. Rather than looking for which approach is correct, we should analyse what implications these discussions have in both theoretical and applied terms. To achieve that it is necessary to ascertain what is the nature and, consequently, what are the implications of identifying international humanitarian law and international human rights law as branches of international law, as well as the attributing specific norms to a particular branch.

Abstract Background This study explores the impacts of attacks perpetrated in the context of armed conflict, to female health workers in three Colombian territories. Methods We conducted a document review of the reports and databases of the Colombian Truth Commission, 17 in-depth semi-structured interviews with experts on the national and regional armed conflict and the medical mission, and 26 female health workers who were victims of attacks. Results Experts and female health workers reported attacks to health activities, facilities, equipment, and personnel, including attacks to traditional doctors belonging to indigenous communities. The most frequent attacks were threats and retention of health personnel; theft of supplies and medicines; damage and use of infrastructure and means of transport for purposes other than health care; and hinderance of health service provision. The attacks occurred in a framework of structural violence that intersects with poverty, racism, and gender bias. The impacts of these attacks include gender-based violence, significant disruption of the lives of health workers, and physical, emotional, psychological, social, and economic effects on the victims and their families. The government response to protect victims and populations has been absent or insufficient. Conclusions Attacks to health care were reported in all the studied territories obstructing adequate health care. Impacts of these attacks affect negatively the professional and personal life of the workers and are aggravated by structural violence and absent or little institutional response.

The Russian aggression against Ukraine involves extensive use of air power, proving that without the sufficient level of air control, the combat operations on the ground face significant operational challenges. The use of air power raises questions regarding the legality of the aerial actions conducted over Ukraine. This conflict in the air domain is characterised by separate campaigns. The first one was a battle over the air superiority of Ukraine, which was relatively short in time (February–April 2022), albeit intense, and lost by the Russian Air Force due to the inability to destroy Ukrainian air defence assets and Ukrainian military aviation. The second one, still in progress at the moment this article is being written, looks to become an unresolved contest of attrition, as both belligerents vastly increased their air disruption capabilities. In particular, during the last period of the first phase, it is believed that many of the Russian air strikes were, in fact, indiscriminate or deliberately directed against civilian objectives. The aim of the article is to analyse the overall conduct of the air war over Ukraine and pinpoint the legal challenges in assessing the legality of such air operations. In the context of available information, the paper will seek to understand the legal framework concerning the destruction of the An-225 at the Hostomel airport during the first phase of hostilities, the use of certain aerial weapons, and the selection of targets.

Article 82 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions requires competent legal advisors to be available, when necessary, to advise military commanders at the appropriate level on the application of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). One of the most important fields of IHL application which requires legal advice is attacks on the enemy, which need to follow the principles of military necessity, humanity, distinction, and proportionality, and are also affected by the requirement to undertake all feasible precautions in order to avoid or at least minimise incidental harm to civilians (collateral damage). One of the ways to ensure that attacks on enemy remain compliant with the requirements of IHL is by adopting appropriate targeting procedures and tools facilitating avoidance or minimising collateral damage, such as the Collateral Damage Estimation Methodology (CDEM). Media coverage of the Russian-Ukrainian war has contributed significantly to the misperception of IHL provisions applicable to targeting. During the war in Ukraine, political declarations were made several times that a war crime had occurred in the form of a deliberate attack on the civilian object. However, the legality of a particular strike can rarely be judged based upon the results of the strike or via post-strike Battle Damage Assessment (BDA). The so-called Rendulic rule emphasises that military necessity, proportionality, and precautions are judged a priori, based upon by the information available at the time of the decision (circumstances ruling at the time) and not on the basis of information emerging after the decision had been made. Legal Advirsors’ role in the targeting process requires them to possess at least the basic knowledge of the Targeting Process and the CDEM, general military expertise in the fields of Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (TTPs), as well as effects of the employment of particular weapon systems in given circumstances. This should be supported by thorough knowledge of IHL, in particular the practical aspects of its application in military operations. It should be about the intersection of legal and technical expertise.

The article explores the question of crimes committed against the civilian population during the war in Ukraine and the possible ways of bringing to justice those responsible. A full-scale aggression launched by Russia has caused death and widespread suffering of thousands of Ukrainian civilians and combatants. The article focuses on the events following 24th February, 2022, bearing in mind that the conflict had started much earlier – with the illegal annexation of Crimea and the beginning of fighting in eastern part of the Ukraine in 2014. After introductory remarks in the first section, the second part of this article will be focusing on different acts constituting war crimes that were committed during the war in Ukraine, and the third part will address existing accountability mechanisms and briefly discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each of them.

The protection of civilians is a basic ethical, strategic, and legal requirement for the international community and every democratic state, one of the key aspects of any military (combat) action. Such protection should not only be proclaimed, but also serve as a priority. If armed forces during armed conflicts rely on the foundation laid by international humanitarian law and adhere to civilised rules of military (combat) operations, then the damage caused to the civilian population can be minimised. This problem is also important in terms of the international and national legal protection of the civilian population during the international military conflict in Ukraine.

Copyright of Revista de Direitos Fundamentais & Democracia is the property of Revista de Direitos Fundamentais & Democracia and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines the evolution of international legal standards aimed at defining responsibility for violations of laws and customs of war from the second half of the 19th century to the first half of the 20th century. It emphasizes that war is undoubtedly one of the most dreadful events that can impact people's lives and society. However, if it is not controlled or conducted in accordance with international norms and standards, its consequences can be even more devastating and catastrophic. Since the beginning of the full-scale armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, the term «violation of laws and customs of war» has become widespread. Responsibility for such actions is provided for by Article 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. However, the criminalization of this act is not related to Ukraine's domestic legal order, as violations of laws and customs of war are an international crime that causes serious harm to people, economic objects, and cultural heritage, creating a high level of societal danger. The article covers an analysis of key international documents such as the Geneva Conventions, decisions of the Hague Conferences, and UN resolutions, exploring their influence on shaping legal norms in this area. It examines changes in legal regulation, their causes, and consequences, as well as the role of specific individuals and historical events in this process. This research is important for understanding past experiences in the context of current challenges and conflicts, as well as for further development of international law and ensuring the protection of human rights during armed conflicts. In conclusion, it is noted that the second half of the 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries witnessed significant development of international legal standards concerning responsibility for violations of laws and customs of war. This period was crucial in shaping the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law aimed at protecting human rights during armed conflicts. As a result of this process, a series of international treaties and conventions were adopted, which established rules of conduct in armed conflicts and mechanisms for accountability for their violations. These standards have been an important step in humanizing war and protecting human rights during armed conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is dedicated to exploring the legislation of Ukraine in the sphere of regulating war crimes. The research is based on the analysis of normative acts of international humanitarian and criminal law, which have established serious violations of the laws and customs of war and equated them with serious international crimes. Additionally, attention is focused on the longstanding experience of international institutions dealing with the regulation of the mechanism of punishment for war criminals. For Ukraine, the issue of war crimes has become relevant in the conditions of armed conflict caused by the aggression of the Russian Federation. Currently, the number of these crimes is gradually increasing. By the end of 2023, over 109,000 instances of war crimes committed by the Russian armed forces had been documented. Alongside, the number of criminal proceedings for violations of the laws and customs of war is increasing. It was further noted that deficiencies in the legislative definition of war crimes and the lack of necessary legal practice in such a specific category of offenses lead to difficulties in qualifying war crimes. The basis for qualifying a crime is the composition of a criminal offense. In Ukraine, there is a single provision providing for criminal liability for violations of the laws and customs of war -- Section 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. This article lacks both a definition of war crime and a clear objective aspect of the offense, and the punishment is less severe compared to other general criminal statutes. Section 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine is generic. Due to such wording of war crimes in Ukraine, the practice of additional qualification of violations of the laws and customs of war under articles on torture, intentional grievous bodily harm, intentional moderate bodily harm, intentional minor bodily harm, coercion to testify, etc., has spread. Avoiding difficulties in qualifying war crimes can be achieved through access to sources of international humanitarian and criminal law. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is one of the most important legal acts that has codified the entire range of elements of war crimes and detailed them. Ukraine is a signatory to the Rome Statute, but has not yet ratified it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article is devoted to the analysis of violations by the Russian Federation of the provisions of the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War in relation to certain categories of socially vulnerable groups of the population in the context of a full-scale invasion (on the example of Chernihiv region). It is emphasized that Ukraine is currently a socially oriented state, its activities are aimed at providing life support and support to socially vulnerable citizens, creating conditions for their decent existence in society. One of the elements of the national state policy in the field of social protection of the population is a well-developed system of state social and medical institutions for persons with mental disorders, the elderly, persons with disabilities, patients, etc. A significant number of people living in these institutions are unable to take care of themselves and need constant care and attention. Chernihiv region, which borders the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus in the north of Ukraine, is one of the ten regions most affected by the aggression of the above-mentioned states. During the period of occupation of Chernihiv region by the military of the Russian Federation, from February 24, 2022 to April 3, 2022, a number of episodes of violations of the laws and customs of warfare were documented - shelling of civilians and evacuation routes with prohibited weapons, executions, looting, rape, etc. Numerous cases of shelling of social welfare institutions and medical facilities where socially vulnerable groups of the population were permanently or temporarily residing were emphasized, which is a gross violation of Articles 16, 18, 20, 28 of the Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. The documented war crimes committed by Russian military personnel against civilians from among socially vulnerable citizens need to be studied, made public and condemned by the international community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Journal for Technology in Theory & Practice / Zeitschrift für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie und Praxis (TATuP) is the property of Oekom Verlag GmbH and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Since the Hamas attacks in Israel on 7 October 2023, the Israeli military has launched an assault in the Gaza Strip, which included over 12,000 targets struck and over 25,000 tons of incendiary munitions used by 2 November 2023. The objectives of this study include: (1) the descriptive and inferential spatial analysis of damage to critical civilian infrastructure (health, education, and water facilities) across the Gaza Strip during the first phase of the military campaign, defined as 7 October to 22 November 2023 and (2) the analysis of damage clustering around critical civilian infrastructure to explore broader questions about Israel's adherence to International Humanitarian Law (IHL). Methods: We applied multi-temporal coherent change detection on Copernicus Sentinel 1-A Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery to detect signals indicative of damage to the built environment through 22 November 2023. Specific locations of health, education, and water facilities were delineated using open-source building footprint and cross-checked with geocoded data from OCHA, OpenStreetMap, and Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team. We then assessed the retrieval of damage at and with close proximity to sites of health, education, and water infrastructure in addition to designated evacuation corridors and civilian protection zones. The Global Moran's I autocorrelation inference statistic was used to determine whether health, education, and water facility infrastructure damage was spatially random or clustered. Results: During the period under investigation, in the entire Gaza Strip, 60.8% (n = 59) of health, 68.2% (n = 324) of education, and 42.1% (n = 64) of water facilities sustained infrastructure damage. Furthermore, 35.1% (n = 34) of health, 40.2% (n = 191) of education, and 36.8% (n = 56) of water facilities were functionally destroyed. Applying the Global Moran's I spatial inference statistic to facilities demonstrated a high degree of damage clustering for all three types of critical civilian infrastructure, with Z-scores indicating < 1% likelihood of cluster damage occurring by random chance. Conclusion: Spatial statistical analysis suggests widespread damage to critical civilian infrastructure that should have been provided protection under IHL. These findings raise serious allegations about the violation of IHL, especially in light of Israeli officials' statements explicitly inciting violence and displacement and multiple widely reported acts of collective punishment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this paper is to examine the lessons learned till mid-2023 from the war in Ukraine to find out how attacking or seizing nuclear power plants (NPPs) can be utilised to advance military and political objectives during an armed conflict. The qualitative research approach has been applied to the study, focusing on an analysis of academic research and relevant acts of international law. In order to examine Russia’s approach to the attacks against the Chernobyl and Zaporizhzhia NPPs, numerous reports, official statements by the authorities, press releases, and Internet sources have been analysed. For evaluation of nuclear security and safety standards in Ukraine, the “seven pillars” model proposed by the International Atomic Energy Agency has been adopted. The study indicates that strategically located NPPs can be used as “nuclear shields” for the occupying forces deployed at the plant or nearby. They may also become useful tools of “lawfare” waged with the use of flawed interpretations of international humanitarian law. Finally, nuclear security-related narrations analysed in the paper clearly prove that seized NPPs can be effectively used in information warfare. The research leads to the conclusion that civil NPPs in war zones can be weaponised and exploited by the hostile forces not only for impeding energy supplies (and thus shattering the public morale of the adversary) but also for blackmailing and coercing the decisionmakers of the attacked state and their international allies with a vision of man-made nuclear disaster. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cyberspaces can be significantly influenced by simple tools and tactics, and offer cost-effective solutions for states to achieve their objectives. However, it can also be used for conducting cyberwarfare, and its effects remain in gray areas. The spectrum of cyberwarfare activities ranges from minor web disruptions to crippling attacks on critical national infrastructures. Nevertheless, cyberattacks present a unique challenge in applying well-established humanitarian legal principles, particularly regarding the distinction between civilian and military targets. This is because of the interconnectedness and shared infrastructure of cyberspace between civilian and military entities, which blurs the lines between combatants and civilian populations. This article seeks to shift the general perception of the problems associated with this manner of conducting hostilities by building on the learning of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Furthermore, the authors examine the cyber activities that occurred during the conflict and the legal and ethical challenges that arise from classifying these activities and applying international law. They try to distinguish cyber activities as an act of force or armed attack, with a focus on determining the criteria that played a role in this classification, in light of Articles 2 (4) and 51 of the UN Charter. With reference to the United Nations (UN) Charter and the principles of self-defence, the concept of attack is scrutinised. Furthermore, the article addresses the principles of distinction and proportionality in relation to qualified cyber activities as an armed attack in the same conflict, emphasising the importance of the principle of proportionality in assessing cyber warfare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Russia-Ukraine war demonstrates the crucial role of technology in modern warfare. The use of digital networks, information infrastructure, space technology, and artificial intelligence has distinct military advantages, but raises challenges as well. This essay focuses on the way it exacerbates a rather familiar challenge: the "civilianization of warfare." Today's high-technology warfare lowers the threshold for civilian participation in the war effort. A notable example is the widespread use of smartphone apps by Ukrainian civilians, who thereby help the armed forces defend against Russian aggression. Through the lenses of international humanitarian law, conventional just war theory, and revisionist just war theory, this essay evaluates the normative dimensions of such civilian participation. The analysis shows that civilians can lose their legal protections when they use these apps to directly participate in hostilities, and this loss of immunity can be justified by Michael Walzer's conventional just war theory. Revisionism, however, puts the justness of the war at the forefront, and so sheds doubt on the moral liability of Ukrainian civilians. Considering the broader implications, including the blurring combatant-civilian distinction, indicates that such civilianization of warfare should not be welcomed; the risks will often outweigh the benefits. At a minimum, states ought to exercise restraint in mobilizing civilians and inform them of the implications of their actions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since commencing its illegal invasion in 2022, the Russian military and authorities have committed numerous war crimes against the people of Ukraine. These include the mutilation and execution of combatants; the torture, kidnapping, forced expulsion, rape, and massacre of civilians; and indiscriminate attacks on densely populated areas. In this essay, I evaluate the strategic implications of this misconduct, focusing exclusively on Western responses. I argue that war crimes can and often do negatively impact the strategic goals of the perpetrator, but whether and how this occurs is rarely governed exclusively by the offending action. Western perceptions of battlefield atrocity, shaped as they are by identity, race, and politics, may radically shift from one context to another. In the case of the Russia-Ukraine war, the status of both the participants and the conflict itself has helped inculcate a particular sensitivity among Western actors to the battlefield criminality of Russia. Drawing on evidence from the 2022 Bucha massacre and the ongoing bombing of Ukrainian civilians, I argue that Russian misconduct has consolidated Western support for the Ukrainian military effort, politically, diplomatically, and materially. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The criminal law assessment of each violation of the rules and customs of war under Article 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code of Ukraine) requires reference to international treaties establishing such rules. This is indicated by the disposition of this article. In turn, international treaties have a list of provisions that contain instructions on prohibitions for parties to international armed conflicts and on specific violations of the rules and customs of war. This list is quite wide, due to which problems arise during the practical application of Article 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, in particular, when formulating an indictment. Serious violations of the rules and customs of war include, in particular, turning the civilian population or individual civilians into targets of attack. Establishing objective and subjective signs of this act is of scientific interest. In the norms of international humanitarian law, this violation is formulated atypically for domestic criminal legislation. In addition, there are issues of differentiation with other serious violations of the rules and customs of war, correlation with prohibitions and requirements established in the norms of international humanitarian law. In order to clarify the essence of this violation, the norms of international treaties, which are part of international humanitarian law, as well as their interrelationship, were analyzed. This made it possible to draw conclusions about the objective features by which it is possible to distinguish the analyzed violation from other homogeneous violations, for example, from committing attacks of an indiscriminate nature. Possible variants of a subjective attitude to the commission of such a violation as the transformation of the civilian population or individual civilians into an object of attack are also defined. In addition, examples from judicial practice were considered with an emphasis on ways of formulating charges under Art. 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The importance of instructions for the commission of a serious violation of an international agreement during the formulation of charges in such proceedings is emphasized and substantiated. Prospects for further research on issues related to the criminal-legal assessment of attacks on the civilian population in the context of an international armed conflict are outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

‘Pope calls on G7 leaders to ban use of autonomous weapons’ (The Guardian 2024) is the headline from statements which pope Franziskus made during the G7-summit on June 14th, 2024. In general it can be observed that the ethical debate concerning the use of autonomous weapon systems (AWS) is an extremely complex and contentious issue, raising both technical and ethical challenges. Through a comparative analysis of relevant literature the theological perspective is introduced into the debate and highlight potential implications for the use of AWS. The increasing autonomy, where machines can autonomously select and engage targets, raises questions regarding compliance with international humanitarian law, the preservation of human dignity and moral responsibility. The research question addressed in this article is as follows: ‘What are the theological-ethical arguments regarding the use of AWS?’ In conclusion, three key points for a theological-ethical examination consist of the question about the pessimistic human image as a premise of the pro-AWS argumentation and ethical questions based on the highest or preferable good as well as on moral responsibility. It is synthesised, that the pessimistic human image can be represented, that as highest good right to life should be preferred against human dignity and that moral responsibility always should stick on humans and not on AWS. Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: This article positions theological ethics within the emerging field of ethical dilemmas arising from autonomous functions in the realm of technical ethics.

This article is an attempt to add layers to the discussions of ongoing mass atrocities committed in several parts of the world by discussing an under-reported situation of large scale violence unfolding in Sudan since April 2023, in the hope that the ‘international community’ can address multiple catastrophic situations with similar urgency, mobilise for justice for all peoples, end the culture of impunity, and eventually shift the discourse towards the structural causes of such large-scale violence in different parts of the world.

One of the most important goals of developing the rules of international humanitarian law is to protect people who are not directly involved in war in most cases, but the violence and suffering caused by war is imposed on them. As one of the vulnerable groups, women are exposed to being victimized due to war crimes or crimes against humanity, especially during civil wars. When a civilian group, in the territory of a government enters into conflict with that government, a situation of non-international armed conflict is created; A situation that will be governed by different rules than those governing international armed conflicts. The rules that result from Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the second additional protocol and international custom. Dominating a part of the territory of a country by the forces on a continuous basis, having minimum facilities to establish a base inside the territory of the conflict, having a responsible commander, etc. are the most important characteristics of a hostile group, and in this case, it is possible to implement the rules of law. International humanitarianism is expected from them. The black figure of women's victimization due to their gender in armed conflicts has led to the lack of identification of the perpetrators and the lack of necessary support for them, and this itself leads to their secondary victimization. In internal armed conflicts, the issue of women's victimization, due to the occurrence of violence inside the territory of a country and its inability to be monitored by international institutions on the one hand, and their victimization (direct and indirect) from different directions on the other hand, along with numerous problems It becomes more important in repairing the damage caused to them. In addition, the governments do not want to provide humanitarian support and aid to their nationals and citizens in the event of a civil war, and in the event of this type of conflict, they seek to suppress the opposition to the extent that the perpetrators of war crimes and ... be. Today, the violation of women's rights in internal armed conflicts as people who did not play an active role in these conflicts is recognized as a war crime. Because war crime is known as a gross violation of international humanitarian rights in armed conflicts, and the violation of women's rights is a gross manifestation of this violation. Although committing these actions in some cases leads to a crime against humanity or even genocide. Since the violation of the rules of humanitarian rights has been done in the territory of a state, not only the people involved in these conflicts, but also the states (whether the state that is a party to the conflict or the state that helps one of the parties to the war) are committed and obliged to respect the rights are international humanitarians and in case of violation of these international rules, they will be responsible for the victims of crimes. In the rules of international humanitarian law governing civil wars, the civil and international responsibility of governments and perpetrators of crimes in these conflicts is emphasized. In addition to accepting the violation of women's rights as a war crime and a crime against humanity (as the case may be), the statutes and jurisprudence of international criminal courts have considered the perpetrators of these crimes to be criminally responsible. This article, using the descriptive-analytical method, using library resources and card cabinet tools, seeks to investigate the issue of what are the most important manifestations of the violation of women's rights in civil wars as a violation of international humanitarian rights and its effects, and the procedure How has international criminal courts been in identifying numerous cases of violation of women's rights? Sexual violence, as the most obvious example of the violation of women's rights in internal armed conflicts, has led to many destructive effects on women, which is confirmed by the studies conducted during internal armed wars and especially after the end of the war and violence. What the numerous cases of internal armed wars and the judicial procedure of international criminal courts show is the lack of appropriate solutions and treatment for women victims of violence in the process of reacting to the violation of their rights, especially in criminal proceedings (Submitting a complaint to the corrupt criminal system, the lack of proper services from lawyers, prosecutors, judges, and the criminal justice system in general), which requires providing different ways of support than what currently exists.

Today’s military takes advantage of technological progress primarily through developments in the war industry. Of particular importance is the development and use of advanced autonomous weapon systems, which are changing the way conflicts are fought and redefining the basic strategies on the modern battlefield. The use of these systems raises ethical, philosophical, and legal questions about the relationship of causality and attribution that must exist between an act and its criminal result.

Recently in June 2022, the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict expressed that the ongoing use and recruitment of children in armed conflict globally warrants "international concern". Notwithstanding the existence of proscriptive norms in terms of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL), international legal violations are nevertheless committed by states and non-state actors. A systematic analysis of the respective normative systems identifies a lacuna between specific provisions thereof. Consequently, violations are committed in armed conflicts for the purposes of IHRL but not IHL, it is contended that this inconsistency in the law perpetuates ongoing child soldiering. It is further contended that this inconsistency establishes a genus of children who are legally unprotected as they fall between the cracks of international law. Based on recent progressive jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice, an approach which will bridge the lacuna between these norms is proposed. Contrary to the view of the International Committee of the Red Cross and with due consideration for the lex specialis principle, it is proposed that the IHL and IHRL instruments should apply in a complementary fashion, as opposed to the separate legal regimes under which they have developed.

The purpose of this essay/editorial - closed on 8 January 2024 - is to formulate as fully as possible, although necessarily provisional, an approach from the perspective of International Law to the war in Gaza that began a little over three months ago, and more generally to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that has lasted at least seventy-five years, with the creation of the state of Israel, the first Arab-Israeli war and the Nakba to which the Palestinian people have been condemned. In other words, this is a brief international legal approach to a moment of crisis and intensification of a historic conflict that, in these months, has been a real turning point in the endless cycle of violence that has plagued the region for decades.To this end, this essay addresses various issues of international legal relevance in relation to the current war in Gaza, such as the conceptualisation of international terrorism; the justification of legitimate self-defence used by Israel and, in particular, the conditions required by International Law for its exercise; as well as the possible commission of serious crimes of international concern - war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide -, the applicability of International Humanitarian Law and the call for individual criminal responsibility in this context.This essay also analyses the response of the international community organized in the United Nations to the current war in Gaza, highlighting the insufficient action of the Security Council during these months of acute crisis, the majority reaction of the General Assembly calling for a cessation of hostilities, and the repeated and futile humanitarian appeals made by its Secretary-General.In order to place the current crisis in the perspective of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, there are also briefly discussed the historical and political context, in particular the results of the occupation of territories in the Six-Day War of 1967, the consistent position of the General Assembly on the Palestinian question, the United Nations action on human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, as well as the Security Council’s action on these Territories and the proposed peace initiatives, in particular with regard to the two-State solution.The essay concludes with concluding remarks and an epilogue where, in view of the current humanitarian catastrophe and the protracted nature of the conflict, calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the release of hostages, and for the current phase of the conflict to become a genuine turning point that can be grasped as an opportunity for peace in the region. LA GUERRA EN GAZA Y EL CONFLICTO PALESTINO-ISRAELÍ: UN PUNTO DE INFLEXIÓN EN MEDIO DE UN CICLO SIN FIN DE VIOLENCIA El objeto de este ensayo/editorial -que se ha cerrado el 8 de enero de 2024- es el de formular de la manera más completa posible -aunque resulte necesariamente provisional- una aproximación desde la perspectiva del Derecho Internacional a la guerra en Gaza iniciada hace poco más de tres meses y, en general, al conflicto palestino-israelí que perdura, como mínimo, desde hace más de setenta y cinco años, con la creación del Estado de Israel, la primera guerra árabe-israelí y la Nakba a la que fue abocado el pueblo palestino. Es decir, se trata de una somera aproximación jurídico-internacional a un momento de crisis y de agudización de un conflicto histórico, que configura en estos meses un auténtico punto de inflexión en el ciclo sin fin de violencia que asola la región desde hace décadas.A estos efectos, en este ensayo se abordan diversas cuestiones de relevancia jurídico-internacional en relación con la actual guerra en Gaza, como la conceptualización del terrorismo internacional; la justificación de la legítima defensa usada por Israel y, en especial, las condiciones que exige el Derecho Internacional para su ejercicio; así como la posible comisión de graves crímenes de trascendencia internacional -crímenes de guerra, crímenes contra la humanidad y genocidio-, la aplicabilidad del Derecho Internacional Humanitario y la exigencia de responsabilidad penal individual en este contexto. También se analiza en este ensayo la reacción de la comunidad internacional organizada en las Naciones Unidas ante la actual guerra en Gaza y, por tanto, se presenta la insuficiente actuación del Consejo de Seguridad a lo largo de estos meses de crisis aguda, la mayoritaria reacción de la Asamblea General pidiendo un cese de las hostilidades y los llamamientos humanitarios formulados vana y reiteradamente por su Secretario General. Para situar la fase actual de crisis en la perspectiva del conflicto palestino-israelí se aborda asimismo, sumariamente, su contexto histórico-político, en particular con los resultados de la ocupación de territorios en la guerra de los Seis Días de1967; la constante posición de la Asamblea General sobre la cuestión Palestina; la acción de las Naciones Unidas en relación con los derechos humanos en los Territorios Palestinos Ocupados; así como la actuación del Consejo de Seguridad respecto de estos Territorios y las iniciativas de paz propuestas especialmente en relación con la solución bieestatal. Por último, se formulan unas consideraciones finales y un epílogo en el que, atendiendo a la actual catástrofe humanitaria y a la perdurabilidad del conflicto, se formula un llamamiento para el cese inmediato de las hostilidades y la liberación de los rehenes y para que la actual fase del conflicto se convierta en un genuino punto de inflexión que pueda propiciar una oportunidad para la paz en la región. LA GUERRE À GAZA ET LE CONFLIT PALESTINO-ISRAÉLIEN : UN TOURNANT AU MILIEU D’UN CYCLE DE VIOLENCE SANS FIN Le but de cet essai/éditorial - qui s’est achevé le 8 janvier 2024 - est de formuler aussi complètement que possible - bien qu’il soit nécessairement provisoire - une approche du point de vue du Droit International de la guerre à Gaza qui a commencé il y a un peu plus de trois mois et, en général, du conflit palestino-israélien qui dure depuis au moins soixante-quinze ans, avec la création de l’État d’Israël, la première guerre israélo-arabe et la Nakba à laquelle le peuple palestinien a été contraint. En d’autres termes, il s’agit d’une brève approche juridico-internationale d’un moment de crise et de l’intensification d’un conflit historique qui, en ces mois, constitue un véritable tournant dans le cycle sans fin de la violence qui sévit dans la région depuis des décennies.À cette fin, cet essai aborde diverses questions de Droit International en rapport avec la guerre actuelle à Gaza, telles que la conceptualisation du terrorisme international, la justification de la légitime défense utilisée par Israël et, en particulier, les conditions requises par le Droit International pour son exercice, ainsi que la commission éventuelle de crimes graves de portée internationale - crimes de guerre, crimes contre l’humanité et génocide -, l’applicabilité du Droit International Humanitaire et l’exigence de responsabilité pénale individuelle dans ce contexte. Cet essai analyse également la réaction de la communauté internationale organisée au sein des Nations unies à la guerre actuelle à Gaza et présente donc l’action insuffisante du Conseil de sécurité tout au long de ces mois de crise aiguë, la réaction majoritaire de l’Assemblée générale appelant à la cessation des hostilités et les appels humanitaires lancés à maintes reprises et en vain par son secrétaire général. Afin de replacer la phase de crise actuelle dans la perspective du conflit palestino-israélien, sont également brièvement évoqués le contexte historico-politique, en particulier les résultats de l’occupation des territoires lors de la guerre des six jours de 1967, la position constante de l’Assemblée générale sur la question palestinienne, l’action des Nations unies en matière de droits de l’homme dans les Territoires Palestiniens Occupés, ainsi que l’action du Conseil de sécurité sur ces Territoires et les initiatives de paix proposées, notamment en ce qui concerne la solution à deux États. L’essai se termine par quelques considérations finales et par un épilogue dans lequel, compte tenu de la catastrophe humanitaire actuelle et de la durée du conflit, un appel est lancé en faveur d’une cessation immédiate des hostilités et de la libération des otages, et pour que la phase actuelle du conflit devienne un véritable tournant qui pourrait offrir une occasion de paix dans la région.

El objeto de este ensayo/editorial –que se ha cerrado el 8 de enero de 2024– es el de formular de la manera más completa posible –aunque resulte necesariamente provisional– una aproximación desde la perspectiva del Derecho Internacional a la guerra en Gaza iniciada hace poco más de tres meses y, en general, al conflicto palestino–israelí que perdura, como mínimo, desde hace más de setenta y cinco años, con la creación del Estado de Israel, la primera guerra árabe–israelí y la Nakba a la que fue abocado el pueblo palestino. Es decir, se trata de una somera aproximación jurídico–internacional a un momento de crisis y de agudización de un conflicto histórico, que configura en estos meses un auténtico punto de inflexión en el ciclo sin fin de violencia que asola la región desde hace décadas.A estos efectos, en este ensayo se abordan diversas cuestiones de relevancia jurídico–internacional en relación con la actual guerra en Gaza, como la conceptualización del terrorismo internacional; la justificación de la legítima defensa usada por Israel y, en especial, las condiciones que exige el Derecho Internacional para su ejercicio; así como la posible comisión de graves crímenes de trascendencia internacional –crímenes de guerra, crímenes contra la humanidad y genocidio–, la aplicabilidad del Derecho Internacional Humanitario y la exigencia de responsabilidad penal individual en este contexto. También se analiza en este ensayo la reacción de la comunidad internacional organizada en las Naciones Unidas ante la actual guerra en Gaza y, por tanto, se presenta la insuficiente actuación del Consejo de Seguridad a lo largo de estos meses de crisis aguda, la mayoritaria reacción de la Asamblea General pidiendo un cese de las hostilidades y los llamamientos humanitarios formulados vana y reiteradamente por su Secretario General. Para situar la fase actual de crisis en la perspectiva del conflicto palestino–israelí se aborda asimismo, sumariamente, su contexto histórico–político, en particular con los resultados de la ocupación de territorios en la guerra de los Seis Días de1967; la constante posición de la Asamblea General sobre la cuestión Palestina; la acción de las Naciones Unidas en relación con los derechos humanos en los Territorios Palestinos Ocupados; así como la actuación del Consejo de Seguridad respecto de estos Territorios y las iniciativas de paz propuestas especialmente en relación con la solución biestatal. Por último, se formulan unas consideraciones finales y un epílogo en el que, atendiendo a la actual catástrofe humanitaria y a la perdurabilidad del conflicto, se formula un llamamiento para el cese inmediato de las hostilidades y la liberación de los rehenes y para que la actual fase del conflicto se convierta en un genuino punto de inflexión que pueda propiciar una oportunidad para la paz en la región. THE WAR IN GAZA AND THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT: A TURNING POINT IN THE MIDST OF AN ENDLESS CYCLE OF VIOLENCE The purpose of this essay/editorial – closed on 8 January 2024 – is to formulate as fully as possible, although necessarily provisional, an approach from the perspective of International Law to the war in Gaza that began a little over three months ago, and more generally to the Palestinian– Israeli conflict that has lasted at least seventy–five years, with the creation of the State of Israel, the first Arab–Israeli war and the Nakba to which the Palestinian people have been condemned. In other words, this is a brief international legal approach to a moment of crisis and intensification of a historic conflict that, in these months, has been a real turning point in the endless cycle of violence that has plagued the region for decades.To this end, this essay addresses various issues of international legal relevance in relation to the current war in Gaza, such as the conceptualisation of international terrorism; the justification of legitimate self–defence used by Israel and, in particular, the conditions required by International Law for its exercise; as well as the possible commission of serious crimes of international concern – war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide –, the applicability of International Humanitarian Law and the call for individual criminal responsibility in this context. This essay also analyses the response of the international community organized in the United Nations to the current war in Gaza, highlighting the insufficient action of the Security Council during these months of acute crisis, the majority reaction of the General Assembly calling for a cessation of hostilities, and the repeated and futile humanitarian appeals made by its Secretary–General. In order to place the current crisis in the perspective of the Palestinian–Israeli conflict, the historical and political context, in particular the results of the occupation of territories in the Six–Day War of 1967, the consistent position of the General Assembly on the Palestinian question, the United Nations action on human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, as well as the Security Council’s action on these Territories and the proposed peace initiatives, in particular with regard to the two–State solution, are also briefly discussed. The essay concludes with concluding remarks and an epilogue where, in view of the current humanitarian catastrophe and the protracted nature of the conflict, calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities and the release of hostages, and for the current phase of the conflict to become a genuine turning point that can be grasped as an opportunity for peace in the region. LA GUERRE À GAZA ET LE CONFLIT PALESTINO-ISRAÉLIEN : UN TOURNANT AU MILIEU D’UN CYCLE DE VIOLENCE SANS FIN Le but de cet essai/éditorial – qui s’est achevé le 8 janvier 2024 – est de formuler aussi complètement que possible – bien qu’il soit nécessairement provisoire – une approche du point de vue du Droit International de la guerre à Gaza qui a commencé il y a un peu plus de trois mois et, en général, du conflit palestino–israélien qui dure depuis au moins soixante–quinze ans, avec la création de l’État d’Israël, la première guerre israélo–arabe et la Nakba à laquelle le peuple palestinien a été contraint. En d’autres termes, il s’agit d’une brève approche juridico–internationale d’un moment de crise et de l’intensification d’un conflit historique qui, en ces mois, constitue un véritable tournant dans le cycle sans fin de la violence qui sévit dans la région depuis des décennies. À cette fin, cet essai aborde diverses questions de Droit International en rapport avec la guerre actuelle à Gaza, telles que la conceptualisation du terrorisme international, la justification de la légitime défense utilisée par Israël et, en particulier, les conditions requises par le Droit International pour son exercice, ainsi que la commission éventuelle de crimes graves de portée internationale – crimes de guerre, crimes contre l’humanité et génocide –, l’applicabilité du Droit International Humanitaire et l’exigence de responsabilité pénale individuelle dans ce contexte. Cet essai analyse également la réaction de la communauté internationale organisée au sein des Nations unies à la guerre actuelle à Gaza et présente donc l’action insuffisante du Conseil de sécurité tout au long de ces mois de crise aiguë, la réaction majoritaire de l’Assemblée générale appelant à la cessation des hostilités et les appels humanitaires lancés à maintes reprises et en vain par son secrétaire général. Afin de replacer la phase de crise actuelle dans la perspective du conflit palestino-israélien, sont également brièvement évoqués le contexte historico–politique, en particulier les résultats de l’occupation des territoires lors de la guerre des six jours de 1967, la position constante de l’Assemblée générale sur la question palestinienne, l’action des Nations unies en matière de droits de l’homme dans les Territoires Palestiniens Occupés, ainsi que l’action du Conseil de sécurité sur ces Territoires et les initiatives de paix proposées, notamment en ce qui concerne la solution à deux États. L’essai se termine par quelques considérations finales et par un épilogue dans lequel, compte tenu de la catastrophe humanitaire actuelle et de la durée du conflit, un appel est lancé en faveur d’une cessation immédiate des hostilités et de la libération des otages, et pour que la phase actuelle du conflit devienne un véritable tournant qui pourrait offrir une occasion de paix dans la région.

Exploration of an outer-space initially and currently is closely related to militarization. All spacecraft, in one way or another, have a dual purpose and can be used for both peaceful and military purposes – from the use of launchers for orbital and suborbital flights to telecommunication systems. In the doctrinal documents of the USA, NATO and the European Union space is considered, among other functions, as a source of “space threats” and as an environment for potential military operations. Military space forces and Commands are structurally separated into a special category within the Armed Forces of Western countries. Comparative analysis of NATO and EU space strategies shows significant differences. NATO places an emphasis on the use of already existing space resources of its member states to implement its traditional goals and objectives, without concentrating on the formation of collective structures advancing space technologies. EU, in contrast, actively integrates technological inputs of its member states with powerful economic potential, initiates and develops collective inter-state projects and structures for space exploration. EU in recent times pays special attention to attempts to ensure European strategic autonomy from the USA and third countries in the space sector. The increasingly intensive entry of private enterprises into the outer space sector has been a characteristic feature at the beginning of the 21st century, their role is expanding, and cooperation of businesses with the state is strengthening on a commercial basis in the form of public-private partnerships.