Search

The civil war in Syria, triggered by the pro-democracy demonstrations of the "Arab Spring", was a complicated combination of religious, cultural and ethnic-identity contradictions. The non-international conflict was turned into a "battlefield" for foreign powers, which led to the transformation of a civil war into a "war with multiple proxies". The United Nations' efforts to mediate the conflict, based on a six-point plan, remained in the draft phase. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have denounced flagrant violations of human rights and international humanitarian law by the al-Assad regime, which has widely used non-discriminatory weapons banned in violation of the Geneva Conventions, 1949. The Bashār al-Assad regime is accused by the international community of being guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity, but attempts to incriminate it have failed.

En el contexto del conflicto armado colombiano han surgido múltiples víctimas por las manifestaciones de graves violaciones a los derechos humanos y las serias infracciones al Derecho Internacional Humanitario, concretadas estas, en crímenes de trascendencia internacional. Por ello, entre otros factores, surgieron los Acuerdos de Paz con las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia - FARC, en La Habana (Cuba). Producto de dicho acuerdo se creó la institución de la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz (JEP) y de ella se desprendieron criterios de priorización que intentan corresponder a una adecuada investigación y juzgamiento de todas las conductas beligerantes. Estos elementos serán el punto de partida de este estudio, para abordar lo relativo a las víctimas del conflicto armado y los avances de la JEP en dos casos priorizados. El método de estudio es documental y se basa tanto en jurisprudencia como en doctrina, relativa a los crímenes internacionales, para entender la priorización desarrollada, acorde a los estándares internacionales para la protección de los derechos humanos en los procesos de justicia transicional.

The institute of international criminal liability of individuals has undergone a long and complicated process of elaboration. Initially the efforts in this sphere were concentrated only in scientific works of international law scholars who found that war was an acceptable way of solving international disputes. The most important question in the doctrine of international criminal liability was the issue of personal liability of individuals who committed war crimes. In the article the author points out the tendencies and provides an indepth analysis of the history of elaboration of the institute of international criminal liability on the basis of numerous works of major scholars in this field starting with Hugo Grocius. Primarily the author focuses on the period of the XIX century and states that neither international legal acts nor international law doctrine of the period could not rise up to the fact of necessity of abolishing international war crimes and first of all of abolishing aggressive war. But without these efforts the active elaboration of the norms of international humanitarian law in the period between the world wars would not have been possible.

The scientific article is devoted to a comprehensive understanding of international legal, procedural, and organizational problems of investigation of war crimes committed during the military conflict in the south and east of Ukraine. It develops the author's concept of investigation of war crimes committed during the armed conflict, scientifically substantiated theoretical provisions and specific patterns that are manifested in the field of legal support, organization of investigation, collection of evidence, methods of investigation of crimes of this type. It is concluded that there is a need to specify the components of war crimes in national legislation. Recommendations for further improvement of criminal and criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine in order to fulfill the state's international obligations in the field of international humanitarian law are given.

El presente documento se enfoca en evidenciar cómo las categorí­as "estado de excepción", "autoritarismo neoliberal" y "biopolí­tica" permiten develar fenómenos sociales concretos causados por el tratamiento de la pandemia COVID-19 por parte del gobierno colombiano durante el perí­odo de confinamiento comprendido entre marzo y septiembre de 2020. Este objetivo es desarrollado a partir de una revisión sistemática de literatura, estadí­sticas oficiales e informes de entidades defensoras de derechos humanos, aplicando el método de revisión documental. Los resultados muestran que durante la pandemia se ha intensificado la violencia en Colombia, lo que se grafica en las violaciones al derecho internacional humanitario, la estigmatización y criminalización de la movilización social y la acción colectiva, las violaciones de los derechos humanos por parte de la fuerza pública, las masacres, el asesinato de lí­deres sociales, minorí­as étnicas, desmovilizados de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC-EP). De igual modo, se ha incrementado la violencia estructural asociada a la pobreza, las medidas sanitarias y el acceso de los colombianos más vulnerables a los servicios de salud y a la vacunación.

“There is no greater sorrow in the world than the loss of your native land”. This phrase attributed to the Greek philosopher Euripides, reflects the drama that has suffered in our history those who had to leave their land as a result of persecution and conflict. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the refugee problem addressed the interest of the international community, which began to assume the task of protecting and assisting refugees through agreements and conventions. The Refuge as a humanitarian institution emerged primarily aimed at providing protection and attention to the victims of historical events in the world, which even with the evolution of societies remain solid. The present reflection article analyzes the state of art of the subject. Part of the question of the true meaning, use and whether there is a simple terminological confusion. The case of Cuba as a part of the International Community. The Cuban state, despite not being a signatory to the international conventions about refuges, has rights and responsibilities that are inherent to its interaction; as well as the procedure of the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Key Word: Asylum, UNHCR, Human rights, International right Refugee Law, International Humanitarian Law, Refugee.

The use of cyber-technologies in times of armed conflict poses serious interpretive challenges, such as what type of cyber operations amount to an ‘attack’ for the purposes of Article 49 of Additional Protocol I. The notion of attack is the cornerstone of the law of targeting, a set of rules that includes the principles of distinction, proportionality and precaution, aimed at limiting the amount of violence that belligerents can lawfully employ on the battlefield. The rationale of these rules is that of increasing the protection of the dignity of the civilian population, which constitutes the main objective of modern international humanitarian law (IHL). In light of these considerations, my article argues that the prevailing interpretation of the notion of attack in the cyber context is too restrictive and cannot adequately protect the civilian population from cyber operations taking place in armed conflict. Consequently, it argues for a human-dignity based interpretation of the notion of ‘violence’ that underlies the notion of attack in the cyber context, going beyond the mere causation of physical violence to include serious psychological violence and serious economic violence as necessary prerequisites to qualify a cyber operation as an ‘attack’. L’utilisation des cybertechnologies en période de conflit armé soulève d’importantes questions d’interprétation, notamment sur le type de cyberopération qui peut être considérée comme une ‘attaque’ au sens de l’article 49 du protocole additionnel I. La notion d’attaque est la pierre angulaire du droit du ciblage, un ensemble de règles comprenant les principes de distinction, de proportionnalité et de précaution, visant à limiter le degré de violence que des belligérants peuvent légalement utiliser sur le champ de bataille. La raison d’être de ces règles est de renforcer la protection de la dignité de la population civile, qui constitue l’objectif principal du DIH moderne. À la lumière de ces considérations, l’article avance que l’interprétation dominante de la notion d’attaque dans le contexte cybernétique est trop restrictive et ne peut pas protéger efficacement la population civile des cyberopérations lors de conflits armés. Par conséquent, l’article plaide pour une interprétation de la notion de ‘violence’, sous-jacente à la notion d’attaque dans le contexte cybernétique, basée sur la dignité humaine, allant au-delà de la seule violence physique pour inclure la violence psychologique grave et la violence économique grave dans les conditions pour qu’une cyberopération puisse être qualifiée d’ ‘attaque’. Het gebruik van cybertechnologieën in tijden van gewapend conflict stelt ons voor serieuze interpretatieve uitdagingen, zoals de vraag welk type cyberoperaties neerkomen op een 'aanval' in de zin van Art. 49 van het Aanvullend Protocol I. Het begrip aanval is de hoeksteen van het recht van doelbestrijding, een geheel van regels dat de beginselen van onderscheid, evenredigheid en voorzorg omvat, en dat tot doel heeft de hoeveelheid geweld te beperken die oorlogvoerende partijen rechtmatig op het slagveld kunnen aanwenden. De grondgedachte achter deze regels is de bescherming van de waardigheid van de burgerbevolking te vergroten, hetgeen de voornaamste doelstelling van het moderne IHR is. In het licht van deze overwegingen betoogt mijn artikel dat de gangbare interpretatie van het begrip aanval in de cybercontext te restrictief is en de burgerbevolking niet adequaat kan beschermen tegen cyberoperaties die plaatsvinden in een gewapend conflict. Bijgevolg wordt gepleit voor een op menselijke waardigheid gebaseerde interpretatie van het begrip ‘geweld’ dat ten grondslag ligt aan het begrip aanval in de cybercontext, waarbij verder wordt gegaan dan het louter veroorzaken van fysiek geweld en ook ernstig psychologisch geweld en ernstig economisch geweld worden beschouwd als noodzakelijke voorwaarden om een cyberoperatie als een ‘aanval’ te kunnen aanduiden. El uso de tecnologías cibernéticas en tiempos de conflicto armado plantea serios desafíos interpretativos, tales como qué tipo de operaciones cibernéticas equivalen a un ‘ataque’ a los efectos del art. 49 del Protocolo Adicional I. El concepto de ataque es la piedra angular de la ley de selección de objetivos, un conjunto de reglas que incluye los principios de distinción, proporcionalidad y precaución, destinados a limitar la medida de violencia que los beligerantes pueden emplear legalmente en el campo de batalla. La razón fundamental de estas normas es aumentar la protección de la dignidad de la población civil, que constituye el principal objetivo del DIH moderno. A la luz de estas consideraciones, este artículo sostiene que la interpretación predominante del concepto de ataque en el contexto cibernético es demasiado restrictiva y no puede proteger adecuadamente a la población civil frente a las operaciones cibernéticas que tienen lugar en un conflicto armado. En consecuencia, aboga por una interpretación centrada en la dignidad humana del concepto de ‘violencia’ que subyace a la noción de ataque en el contexto cibernético, yendo más allá de la mera causalidad de la violencia física para incluir la violencia psicológica grave y la violencia económica grave como requisitos previos necesarios para calificar una operación cibernética como un ‘ataque’. L'uso di tecnologie informatiche in tempi di conflitto armato pone gravi sfide interpretative, come ad esempio quale tipo di operazioni informatiche equivalgono ad un attacco ai fini dell'Art. 49 del Protocollo Addizionale I. La nozione di attacco è la base della legge di targeting, un insieme di regole che include i principi di distinzione, proporzionalità e precauzione, volte a limitare la quantità di violenza che i belligeranti possono legittimamente impiegare sul campo di battaglia. La logica di queste regole è quella di aumentare la protezione della dignità della popolazione civile, che costituisce l'obiettivo principale del moderno IHL. Alla luce di queste considerazioni, l'articolo sostiene che l'interpretazione prevalente della nozione di attacco nel contesto informatico sia troppo restrittiva e non possa proteggere adeguatamente la popolazione civile dalle operazioni informatiche che si svolgono in conflitti armati. Di conseguenza, sostiene un'interpretazione basata sulla dignità umana della nozione di violenza che sta alla base della nozione di attacco nel contesto informatico, andando oltre l’essere la mera causa di violenza fisica per includere la violenza psicologica grave e la violenza economica grave come prerequisiti necessari per qualificare un'operazione cibernetica come un ‘attacco’. Die Verwendung von Cybertechnologien in Zeiten eines bewaffneten Konflikts stellt uns vor schwere interpretative Herausforderungen, wie die Frage, welche Art von Cyberoperationen einen ‘Angriff’ im Sinne von Art. 49 des Zusatzprotokolls I darstellen. Der Begriff ‘Angriff’ ist der Eckstein der Zielgesetze, einer Sammlung von Regeln, die die Grundsätze der Unterscheidung, Verhältnismäßigkeit und Vorsorge umfassen, welche zum Ziel haben, das Maß von Gewalt, das Krieg führende Staaten rechtmäßig auf dem Schlachtfeld verwenden können, zu beschränken. Der Grundgedanke dieser Regeln besteht darin, den Schutz der Würde der Zivilbevölkerung, der das Hauptziel des modernen internationalen humanitären Rechts ausmacht, zu erhöhen. Angesichts dieser Betrachtungen, argumentiert mein Artikel, dass die gängige Interpretation des Begriffs ‘Angriff’ im Cyber-Kontext zu restriktiv ist und die Zivilbevölkerung nicht adäquat vor der Durchführung von Cyberangriffen in bewaffneten Konflikten schützen kann. Folglich befürwortet der Artikel eine auf Menschenwürde basierte Interpretation des dem Begriff ‘Angriff’ im Cyber-Kontext zugrunde liegenden Begriffs ‘Gewalt’, die über die reine Verursachung physischer Gewalt hinausgeht und auch schwere psychische und wirtschaftliche Gewalt als notwendige Bedingungen umfasst, um eine Cyberoperation als einen ‘Angriff’ zu bezeichnen.

Drug-trafficking in Colombia has been a widely researched phenomenon, especially now, as the country undergoes a transition process with its older guerrilla. Now more than ever it is fundamental to examine how drug-trafficking organizations violent activities affect the consolidation of peace. This article considers different approaches to study violence derived from drug-trafficking, in order to advance towards the objectives of transitional justice. For that matter, this work is based on the idea that drug-trafficking directly generates and reproduces violence which is fueled by the structural violence present in the Colombian context. My thesis is that this phenomenon deters non-repetition guarantees and weakens democracy, which is why there will be three main arguments presented that will revolve around the lack of consensus and the implications of considering drug wars as civil wars, how decisions related to the conceptual apprehension limit the competence of international humanitarian law, and the need for holistic strategies capable of facing drug-trafficking’s political and violent power. Later, alternatives will be explored around the possibilities that each argument offers, as well as which aspects could contribute to a more appropriate approach to combat drug-trafficking. Lastly, I will defend why implementing bottom-up oriented actions can advance towards transitional justice’s intermediate and final objectives, as it is the only alternative that escapes fatalist, utopian or interventionist scenarios.

How might the Treaty on the Prohibition on Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) help prevent the use of nuclear weapons? Since the adoption of the TPNW in 2017, much has been said about the Treaty’s impact on nuclear disarmament. Less has been said about how the Treaty’s international humanitarian law (IHL)-based prohibition of the use of nuclear weapons may be best leveraged to further strengthen the long-standing norm against such use. This article explores how the design of the first meeting of States Parties to the TPNW may help ensure respect for the Treaty’s prohibition on the use of nuclear weapons.

Численні публікації розкривають окремі аспекти створення та діяльності приватних військових компаній, користування їх послугами різними державами та міжнародними організаціями. Також відмічається, що останнім часом кількість, чисельність та оснащеність цих компаній значно зросла, роль у воєнних конфліктах у різних регіонах світу набуває подекуди вирішального характеру. Ретроспективний аналіз діяльності приватних військових компаній, їх класифікація і роль у сучасних воєнних конфліктах є актуальним завданням з точки зору забезпечення воєнної безпеки України. В умовах подальшої глобалізації світової економіки роль приватних військових організацій в майбутніх війнах і збройних конфліктах буде зростати. 2. На відміну від традиційних інститутів армії і поліції, дії яких регламентуються як міжнародним, так і національним законодавством, законодавчих рамок діяльності ПВК на міжнародному та національному (за винятком США і ПАР) рівні в даний час не існує. Женевські конвенції не є перешкодою для західних ПВК навіть при використанні цими організаціями своїх контрактантів у відкритих боях. До тих пір, поки співробітники ПВК не є частиною збройних сил сторін конфлікту і не беруть безпосередню участь у військових діях, вони повинні розглядатися як цивільні особи і користуватися захистом Міжнародного гуманітарного права (МГП). У разі безпосередньої участі в збройному конфлікті Контрактанти втрачають право на захист і можуть бути піддані нападу, а при попаданні в полон їм не належить статус військовополонених, але надається весь комплекс захисту відповідно до Четвертої Женевської конвенції. Залучення приватних комерційних структур до забезпечення і, нерідко, ведення бойових дій, а також виникнення власних армій у великих міжнародних корпораціях, тісне переплетення в зоні конфлікту інтересів державних та недержавних суб’єктів істотно змінює образ сучасної війни, що необхідно враховувати військово-політичному керівництву в військовому будівництві.

إن فظاعة ووحشية جرائم الحرب في النزاعات المسلحة الغير دولية وعدم حماية الأفراد في حالات الاضطرابات والتوترات الداخلية التي لم تستثن حتى الفئات الضعيفة والأعيان اللازمة لحياتهم کما حدث في ليبيا واليمن والسودان وسوريا، فضلا عن مون المبادئ الإنسانية أصبحت مهددة بالزوال في ظل هذه النزاعات نتيجة لإزدياد تعلق أطراف النزاع بمفهوم النصر ولو على حساب هذه المبادئ، لطالما اعتبرت الاضطرابات والتوترات أوضاعا داخلية تنطبق عليها القوانين الداخلية، مما يعني أنه لا يمکن تطبيق أحکام القانون الدولي الإنساني على المتضررين من الانتهاکات التي تقع عليهم لذلک سعت الکثير من المنظمات المهتمة بحقوق الإنسان إلى تغيير هذا التوجه في مختلف المؤتمرات الدولية التي نظمتها، وذلک من منطلق أن حماية شخص الإنسان وسلامته وکرامته وحياته ضرورة آمرة في کل الأوقات والظروف، ولذلک فإن قضاء هذه الأوضاع من مجال حماية القانون الدولي الإنساني لا يعني غياب القانون عنها، وإنما توجه الحماية نحو قواعد أکثر شمولا: موضوعيا، زمنيا، مکانيا، وشخصيا، والمقصود هنا هي قواعد القانون الدولي لحقوق الإنسان. The atrocity and brutality of war crimes in non-international armed conflicts and the failure to protect individuals in situations of internal disturbances and tensions that did not exclude even the vulnerable groups and objects necessary for their lives, as happened in Libya, Yemen, Sudan and Syria, as well as the moon, humanitarian principles have become threatened with extinction in light of these conflicts as a result of the increasing attachment of The parties to the conflict in the concept of victory, even at the expense of these principles, have always considered disturbances and tensions as internal conditions to which internal laws apply, which means that the provisions of international humanitarian law cannot be applied to those affected by the violations that occur to them. Therefore, many human rights organizations have sought to change this approach. In the various international conferences that I organized, on the premise that the protection of the human person, his integrity, dignity and life is a peremptory necessity at all times and circumstances. Therefore, excluding these situations from the field of protection of international humanitarian law does not mean the absence of law from it, but rather directs protection towards more comprehensive rules: Objectively, temporally, spatially and personally, what is meant here are the rules of international human rights law. The study aims to lay down a system or rules to regulate these internal tensions and disturbances, whether international or non-international armed conflicts, in order to reduce the occurrence of violations and alleviate suffering in international humanitarian law. The problem of the study revolves around two main issues: First: Since internal disturbances and tensions are not covered by international humanitarian law, then what is the best way to find legal rules in order to protect the individual from the arbitrariness and excesses of authority, and how can the humanitarian activities aimed at helping victims of violence be protected? Second: Did international law provide the necessary protection that guarantees at least the minimum rights for civilians and civilian objects during internal tensions and disturbances, and if this is the case, were these rules actually applied during them? The study reached many results, including in terms of application, as the current non-international armed conflicts demonstrated the ineffectiveness of applying international humanitarian law to them and the difference in legal systems applied to the two types of international armed conflicts and non-international armed conflicts, so that the former has growing legal rules in order to protect its victims. While we find that the second type has only some insufficient rules

The purpose of the article is to analyse problems arising from applying the rules of International Humanitarian Law in cyberspace, particularly the problems of ratione materiae and ratione temporis of this branch of Public International Law in cyberspace. The rapid development of cyber technologies that can be used within an armed conflict affirm the applicability of this research. The existence of “The Tallinn Manual 2.0” on International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations also confirms the impact of this topic on the modern world. The fact that parties in armed conflicts use new technologies in cyberspace does not affect the applicability of IHL rules to such military actions. In the context of this issue, a key question which instigates scientific discussion is that of which cyber operations are subject to the regulation of the law of cyber armed conflicts. The urgent need to study this problem stems from the fact that cyberspace is not an ordinary theatre of war, with the means and methods of warfare used in it being in no way related to the traditional use of armed force; given this quality of cyber operations, it is essential to understand which areas may be subject to IHL. The article analyses two main doctrinal points of view in relation to this problem; as this doctrine (in the context of this issue) also addresses the legal qualification of cyber-attacks, the article also raises this topical issue. Based on the results of this analysis, the author concludes that, despite all the evidence of theoretical conclusions regarding the problems under analysis, they still do not seem comprehensive due to the lack of relevant state practice, which needs to be developed.

The principles which deal humanity are the core values of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Law (HRL). Both of these codified laws expressly provide utmost protection for rights of women and children suffering war hostilities, armed conflicts and other natural disasters. These vulnerable groups are protected in the behest of International Law as well as Municipal laws. Indeed, it is admitted fact that during such crisis they become most vulnerable subject of the society. In this context, the statutory laws in Pakistan have also been promulgated in consonance with the IHL, HRL and Refugee Law. The main corpus of these rules has been embodied either directly or indirectly in the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, and as such, International Law have been ratified and thus is provisions are binding on Pakistan. However, it is observed that their applicability is not proper at state level, and as such they could not have provide effective remedies to the children and women in Pakistan. The aim of this research is to analyse critically, the applicability of Municipal Laws concerning with the protection of the rights of women and children in Pakistan, and for this objective, doctrinal research method has been adopted.

This research paper evaluates the Islamic values vis-a-vis Geneva Convention concerning the rights of women warriors as prisoners of war by the victorious country. The discussion is to discover the similarities and differences between the two areas on the subject. This study focuses the probability of combining these two separate areas but common in objectivity. The Islamic law protects the women from the scourges of war in a number of ways. Similarly, the Geneva Convention also tries to protect the women as prisoners of war. This study concerns the main research question as to whether there may be the compatibility between Islamic and Geneva Convention law for developing a common code on the issue of rights of women worriers. The objective of the study undertaken is to develop a common code through reconciliation between these two separate regulations for conducting war, and ensuring the upholding of human dignity of female worriers. This will complement the existing knowledge on the issue as a guideline for all concerned in the context of International Humanitarian Law.

Objectives The catastrophic effects of armed conflict, particularly prolonged armed conflict, on individual and public health are well-established. The ‘right’ to healthcare during armed conflict and its lack of enforcement despite a range of United Nations mandated requirements regarding health and healthcare provisions is likely to be a significant feature in future conflicts, as zoonotic induced pandemics become a more common global public health challenge. The issue of enforcement of health rights assurance and its implications for the public health management of global pandemics such as COVID-19 in and between countries and regions in conflict is the objective of this Review. Study Design Narrative Review. Methods Referenced to the framework of International humanitarian law (IHL) and International human rights law (IHRL) in order to explore and discuss the deficits in health rights assurances in conflict settings and illustrate how gaps in protection and lack of enforcement compounds the disease response. Both international humanitarian law, and international human rights law can be leveraged to ensure human and health rights are assured in conflict settings. There is a distinct lack of international criteria with regard to standards of health care coverage, infrastructure and service preservation to the civilian population during times of armed conflict. This has far reaching consequences when confounded by a pandemic or even localised disease outbreak. Results We illustrate how in a pandemic disease emergency, such as COVID-19, all life is threatened; and how leaving the citizen population exposed to this contagion is a human rights breach and an indirect method of warfare. The consequences of failure to effectively address such pandemic infections, (i.e. COVID-19), in a conflict setting are potentially catastrophic as prevention and containment responses are severely constrained by state insecurity, political instability, terrorism, repression, rights abuses and displacement of citizens. Neglect by State actors potentially constitutes a breach of the universal right to life. States cannot justify their failures to mitigate disease based on claims of lack of resources, even when available resources are minimal. Where discrimination of people with a disease, such as COVID-19, or minority groups at the point of access to health facilities occurs, this further breaches the principle of medical neutrality. Conclusions The example of the COVID-19 response may offer a viable route to leverage greater access and coverage of health care in conflict and humanitarian settings. A radicalised partnership approach during these times of emergency is warranted, based on an ethical “humanitarian intervention” approach to provide care to all affected by contagious disease in conflict settings.., Highlights • The catastrophic effects of armed conflict on individual and public health are well-established. • Zoonotic induced pandemics (COVID-19) are a growing public health challenge in conflict settings. • International humanitarian law and human rights law can be leveraged to ensure health rights are assured in conflict settings. • In a pandemic disease emergency life is threatened; and leaving citizens exposed to contagion is a human rights breach and an indirect method of warfare. • States cannot justify their failures to mitigate disease based on claims of lack of resources. • Breaches of medical neutrality occur where discrimination of people with COVID-19 at the point of access to health facilities occurs. • COVID-19 responses may offer a viable route to leverage greater access and coverage of health care in conflict settings.

RESUMEN En el presente artículo de reflexión se establecen los criterios que deben ser tenidos en cuenta en la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz (JEP) implementada a partir del Acuerdo Final para la Terminación del Conflicto y la Construcción de una Paz estable y Duradera (AFTCCPED) suscrito entre el Gobierno Nacional de Colombia y las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia- Ejército del Pueblo (FARC-EP) en el año 2016, para dar aplicación a la amnistia y el indulto, «medidas del Sistema Integral de Verdad, Justicia, Reparación y No Repetición», a personas que están siendo investigadas en esta Jurisdicción con ocasión, por causa o en relación directa o indirecta con el conflicto armado. Tales criterios se identifican a partir de los estándares internacionales establecidos por la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), la Corte Penal Internacional (CPI) y la Corte Constitucional de Colombia, a fin de contar con lineamientos unificados para que el Estado colombiano cumpla con la obligación de investigar, esclarecer, perseguir y sancionar las graves violaciones a los derechos humanos e infracciones al Derecho Internacional Humanitario. ABSTRACT This reflection paper establishes the criteria that should be taken into account in the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (JEP) implemented from the Final Agreement to End the Armed Conflict and Build a Stable and Lasting Peace, signed between the National Government of Colombia and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia - People's Army (Farc-Ep) in 2016, in order to give application to the amnesty and pardon as «measures of the Integral System of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Non-Repetition», to persons being investigated in this jurisdiction on occasion, for cause, or in direct or indirect relation to the armed conflict in Colombia. These criteria were identified based on international standards established by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR), the International Criminal Court and the Constitutional Court of Colombia, in order to have unified guidelines, this with the intention that the Colombian State meet the commitment to investigate, clarify, prosecute and punish serious violations against human rights and violations of International Humanitarian Law.

The operation of military courts is clearly allowed for and, in some cases, mandated by international humanitarian law (IHL). Nevertheless, the use of military courts has been one of the most controversial and hotly debated areas of human rights. Despite the ostensibly exclusive military domain, many human rights bodies have registered significant scepticism towards this type of justice. Consequently, they have sought actively to regulate this ‘IHL space’ with scant attention to the requirements of IHL itself. The article examines comments, case law, draft rules and other measures taken by two human rights frameworks: the United Nations Human Rights Council and the African Commission on Human and People's Rights. It will analyse how, since 2000, these bodies have approached the issue of IHL when assessing the legitimacy and operation of military courts. For instance, do they consider IHL as a source of law guiding their efforts and rely on IHL instruments? How do they resolve conflicts between IHL and international human rights law? Additionally, the article will consider the validity, legality and effectiveness of these efforts. It concludes that, in reviewing military courts, there exists significant neglect of IHL in human rights frameworks. Through overlooking IHL or relegating it to a sub-specialty of international human rights law, these bodies not only ignore applicable law, they deprive themselves of the wealth of expertise found in commentary, debate, jurisprudence and practice in the IHL sphere. Instead, integrating IHL analysis and theory and affording it its appropriate respect within relevant human rights discussions will allow for greater legal and policy coherence, and human rights bodies will be better placed to fulfil their mandates.

The war in Yemen has shown inconsistencies in European Union (EU) member states’ arms export control practices: specifically, how they have applied international humanitarian law standards in their...

This article argues that tort law has a role to play in holding the British government to account for overseas violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law. The context of tortious claims for overseas violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law brings to the fore, on one hand, issues of attribution and Crown and foreign acts of State and, on the other hand, issues of private international law. This article describes the approach of UK courts to key issues raised by tortious claims for overseas violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, namely subject-matter jurisdiction and the law applicable to the merits.

Western states fight against terrorism for decades now, however, certain fundamental regulatory questions stay unanswered to this day. Consequently, with the newest form of terrorism, cyberterrorism, arise just as many legal uncertainties as with conventional terrorism. The complicated and incomplete system of international treaties on (cyber-)terrorism only cover certain aspects of the issue, moreover they generally make the individual states responsible for regulating (cyber-)terrorism without defining a common system of basic rules. In this paper the author discusses cyberterrorism from an international and national legal perspective highlighting the specific area of critical information infrastructure protection. Furthermore the paper also takes into consideration cyberterrorism in the light of international humanitarian law.

The purpose of this article is twofold: to give scientific reasoning for the objectives-based interpretation as a special kind of legal norms’ teleological explication and to apply it for essence, purposefulness and advisability determination of criminal procedural norm on the entitlement of a prosecutor with powers of investigation judge according to Art. 615 of Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine and exercising them in an area (administrative territory) of enacting the measures on the provision of the national security and defence, resistance and deterrence of armed aggression. The methodological basis of the research was general scientific and special methods, namely dialectical, hermeneutic, teleological, logical, historical, formal legal (legal positivism) and natural law (value-based) methods. The dialectical method was the basis for the work; it allowed the author to consider in complex the achievement of objectives of criminal procedure by the Ukrainian legal system. The hermeneutic method was used to define the meaning of the new text of the analysed legal provision. The historical method was manifested in the attempt to discover prerequisites of amendments to the criminal procedural norm. The article has both general legal and criminal procedural, applicable in practice scientific novelty: the author provided his own method of interpretation of criminal procedural provisions, that was named the «objectives-based» method; the author proposed methodological grounds and instruments for it, which originates from the notions on the purpose of Law and human rights in general, and on the purpose of Criminal Process in particular; the author applied the objectives-based interpretation on the provision on the entitlement of a prosecutor with powers of investigation judge and exercising them in an area (administrative territory) of enacting the measures on the provision of the national security and defence, resistance and deterrence of armed aggression in order to solve legal uncertainty of its essence. As a conclusion of conducting the research, the author focuses on the beneficial effects of applying the objectives-based method of interpretation of criminal procedural provisions, its simplicity, promptness and expediency; the author comes to the conclusion that the procedure for restricting fundamental human rights and freedoms introduced in the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine in recent amendments may possibly be inconsistent with relevant provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine; finally, expressed in this article ideas can be used in further scientific and expert researches on the issues of legislative improvement of the criminal procedures in the extraordinary situations – on the legal regime of emergency or martial law. Keywords: objectives-based interpretation; objectives of criminal procedure; ratio legis; ratio juris; Joint Forces Operation; purposefulness of law; advisability of criminal procedure; norms implementation; International Humanitarian Law; prosecution in International Armed Conflict; restriction of rights and freedoms; constitutionality; martial law; boundaries of security zones.

Children enjoy legal protection under international humanitarian law and international human rights law. In situations of armed conflict, children are granted not only general protection as civilians, but special protection as children. Several legal provisions exist in the Geneva Conventions and its Additional Protocols, along with the Convention on the Rights of Child and its Second Optional Protocol on Children in Armed Conflicts. However, despite the current legal framework providing protective rights to children, there are serious issues of compliance by non-state actors, particularly in reference to inducting and using child soldiers. This highlights several legal challenges to international humanitarian law vis a vis the diminished protection of children taking direct part in hostilities. This article discusses the current legal regime protecting children in armed conflict, who take direct and indirect part in hostilities. Thereafter, an analysis is made of situations of international and non-international armed conflicts and the difference in protections accorded to these children, respectively. Lastly, an analysis is made of the compliance mechanisms that may be developed for non-state actors under international humanitarian law to prevent recruitment of children for taking direct or indirect part in hostilities. The issues of compliance by non-state actors and possible responses to such challenges are also addressed.

This paper explores the legality of the land closure imposed upon the Gaza Strip by Israel. After having considered the area under occupation, the paper argues that the legality of the closure must be determined under international humanitarian law, international human rights law, the principle of self-determination of peoples, and the Israeli-Palestinian agreements. In the light of these rules, the arbitrary closure of the Gaza Strip should be considered illegal because it breaches the unity between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and because it violates the freedom of movement of the local population. Moreover, the closure breaches the relevant rules pertaining to the transit of goods in occupied territory. The paper concludes that most of the violations caused by the closure affect peremptory rules which produce obligations erga omnes, so that any state in the international community is entitled to react under the law of state responsibility.

The Emergency Medical Services (EMS) are emergency services generally been designed to provide urgent treatment of patients with life-threatening conditions outside medical facilities. Even though the EMS belongs to the category of socio-economic rights, it nevertheless has great significance in safeguarding one of the most fundamental human rights, the right to life. In fact, international humanitarian law has recognised this important connection by establishing explicit legal rules that oblige states to ensure urgent medical care for the wounded and sick. International human rights law, on the other hand, has no such expressed provisions. However, the problem is not the lack of legal rules applicable to the EMS as such but rather the challenges in human rights perception, which hinder the EMS being perceived as a valuable human right. Therefore, this article essentially argues that international human rights law does not recognise the EMS as a human right sufficiently and that more thorough actions are required from the UN Committee of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) in this regard.

It is well established that the provisions of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) regulates armed conflicts and guarantees protection to civilians. Similarly certain protections are also available under laws, such as, International Law of Occupation (ILOC) and International Human rights Law (IHRL). However, we know that often an occupying power uses force against civilians in the course of and maintenance of its occupation? But what grounds they give for the justification of use of force is the matter of critical focus in this article. We analyze the case studies of the State of Jammu and Kashmir (J & K) and Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) to critically discuss the grounds of use of force under international law.

In the current era of Revolution Industry 4.0, the advance of technology is indeed influenced the rapid development of arms industry. This supported by the arms companies’ contribution in supplying weapons to the warring parties. Nevertheless, such indirect participation in armed conflicts is marred by serious violations of human rights and the law of armed conflicts. By virtue of this reasoning, this article is present to evaluate whether these arms companies are bound by international law. The author observed that there are certain provisions under International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law that can be applied for mitigating, as well as preventing these companies for not conducting any activities with similar nature in the near future.

El objetivo de este artículo es explorar la oportunidad que presenta la crisis del Covid-19 en Ecuador para interpretar el Derecho internacional de los derechos humanos y el Derecho internacional humanitario de manera favorable a proteger el derecho a la salud y los sistemas de asistencia salud en el ciberespacio. A través de una metodología descriptiva que permite un análisis integral de la temática desde el punto de vista jurídico, el artículo sintetiza los principales debates internacionales sobre el alcance de la protección del derecho a la salud al amparo del Derecho internacional de los derechos humanos frente a amenazas cibernéticas; estudia la protección que brinda el Derecho internacional humanitario a los ciudadanos y a los sistemas de asistencia de salud; y examina la situación del Ecuador, como un país que se enfrenta a varios retos en la aplicación de las políticas para asegurar la protección del derecho a la salud y los sistemas de asistencia de salud. El artículo concluye que los desarrollos normativos en ambos sectores no han logrado establecer una protección aceptada y efectiva, con obligaciones claras para los Estados en el espacio cibernético para proteger a las personas y a los sistemas de asistencia de salud. Asimismo, señala que las lagunas del Derecho internacional respecto a la protección de la salud en el ciberespacio se agravan en Ecuador al producirse una disonancia discursiva entre política exterior y nacional, con un impacto en la protección del derecho a la salud.

While disease outbreaks remain to a certain extent unforeseeable, international law provides a comprehensive legal framework requiring States to prevent their harmful consequences, effectively respond to ensuing health emergencies, and cooperate in achieving those aims This contribution shows that, within this framework, many rules take the form of 'due diligence' obligations Obligations of due diligence, albeit inherently flexible to accommodate different capabilities and circumstances, are binding on States They impose a duty to act according to a standard of 'good governance': a State must employ its best efforts to realise certain common goals At least five key sets of rules establishing due diligence duties are relevant to the Covid-19 outbreak: a) the 'no-harm' principle;b) international disaster law;c) the International Health Regulations;d) international human rights law;and e) international humanitarian law We preliminarily identify some of the actions required from States to prevent new outbreaks and respond to the pandemic, whilst assessing compliance with applicable rules We conclude that hard lessons learned during the current crisis should spur more decisive action to prevent and address future public health emergencies © 2020 Copyright 2020 by Antonio Coco and Talita de Souza Dias

En la época contemporánea, los jefes de Estado, motivados por situaciones de emergencia o crisis, han recurrido con frecuencia a un régimen jurídico y político con el fin de obtener facultades extraordinarias que les permitan mantener el statu quo; esto a través de crear e imponer un orden normativo, económico, tributario y social de “anormalidad”. Esa figura, regulada constitucionalmente en casi todos los Estados de este hemisferio, tiene un ancestro remoto, la Roma republicana, y un avance histórico digno de considerarse para entender las dimensiones del concepto. El estado de excepción no puede verse únicamente desde el ángulo político y contemporáneo, más bien, debe ser visto en contexto y a la luz del derecho internacional humanitario que, en últimas, es el sistema que lo nutre, le da forma y límites. El caso de Ecuador, cuestión casi central en este texto, resulta particularmente llamativo, pues, en su historia reciente (13 años) ha vivido más de un centenar de estados de sitio sin control alguno y, a pesar de contar con un esquema de regulación estructurado, debe ser revisado en aras de entender mejor la complejidad del concepto y sus consecuencias. In contemporary times, heads of state, motivated by emergency or crises situations, have frequently resorted to a legal and political regime in order to obtain extraordinary powers that allow them to maintain the statu quo; this through creating and imposing anormative, economic, tax and social order of “abnormality” this constitutionally figure regulated in almost all the States of this hemisphere, has a remote ancestor “Republic Rome” and a historical advance worthy of consideration to understand the dimensions of the concept The state of exception cannot be see only from the political and contemporary angle, rather, It must be seen in context and in light of International Humanitarian Law, which is ultimately the system that nourishes it, gives it shape and limits. The case of Ecuador, and almost central issue in this text, is particularly striking, then, in its recent history (13 years) it has lived more than a hundred states of siege without any control and that despite having a structured regulation scheme should be reviewed in order to better understand the complexity of the concept and its consequences.

The article discusses the possibility of adopting a law on preventing the prosecution and punishment of persons in connection with events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine, provided for by the provisions in article 6 of the Minsk Protocol. The article analyzes the provisions of the criminal legislation of Ukraine, the Constitution of Ukraine, as well as other domestic normative legal acts. The article describes the fact that the purpose of the law on prevention of persecution and punishment of persons in connection with events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions does not correspond to the principles of the Constitution. The criminal legislation separately analyzed certain institutions of criminal law elements of the corpus delict. It was found out which persons are subject to the concept of subjects of crime and made a certain conclusion regarding the release of persons involved in the events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Also, the Institute of criminal law as an exemption from criminal liability was considered, and the types of crimes for which it is impossible to deprive of responsibility were clarified. Mandatory for the analysis of the Institute was to determine the range of crimes that were committed by persons who were involved in events that took place in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions. Another institute of criminal law that was analyzed was the institute of amnesty and clemency. The article revealed the General principles for granting pardons and amnesties. It also identified entities that have the ability to apply amnesty and clemency to persons who have committed a crime. A number of international legal acts in the field of international humanitarian law were analyzed. Shortcomings and conflicts in the existing legal acts regulating relations in this sphere are revealed. The article offers a number of solutions to such problems. Besides, a number of legislative changes are proposed to overcome conflicts. Possible ways of implementing the Minsk Protocol that are not related to the adoption of a separate law are considered.

INTRODUCTION.The article analyses the sources of international law, national legislation of the Russian Federation, as well as that of certain foreign States regulating the operation of private military and security companies (PMSCs) in armed conflict. The article highlights the out-comes of the work of the UN Special Rapporteurs and Working Groups to study the activity of PMSCs and the impact it had on the observance of human rights. The authors further analyze the status of PMSC personnel under international humanitarian law. The article also looks at the positions expressed by the delegations of Member States during the discussion of the 2010 Draft Convention on Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) and provides recommendations for developing an appropriate international regulatory framework. The authors also examined State practice of the implementation of the The Montreux Document on Pertinent International Legal Obligations and Good Practices for Statesт Related to Operations of Private Military and Security Companies During Armed Conflict related to the operation of private military and security companies during armed conflict.MATERIALS AND METHODS.The article contains an analysis of the main sources of international law, the documents drafted by the United Nations International Law Commission, special rapporteurs and working groups on the matter, and State practice. It also addresses Russian and foreign legal scholarship. From a methodological perspective, this study relied on the general scientific (analysis, synthesis, systemic approach) and private legal methods of knowledge (formal-legal, comparative legal studies).RESEARCH RESULTS.Based on the study, it is argued that an international treaty should be adopted to regulate the activities of PMSCs, which would establish mechanisms to monitor and hold PMSCs and their employees legally accountable.

The mechanisms of regional cooperation of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean on the development of the system of reception of refugees and protection of their rights during 1984—2014 are considered. Attention is paid to regional traditions, the dualism of refuge models in Latin America is noted. The issues of legal regulation of the institution of refuge in regional documents are touched upon. It has been established that the evolution of the refugee reception system in the region took place in the framework of the convergence of international law governing human rights, international humanitarian law and international refugee law. It is shown that the improvement of the institution of refuge was not limited to the instruments of classical diplomacy. It is reported that through the efforts of nongovernmental organizations, academia and official diplomacy in the course of negotiations at regular regional forums, a common system of sharing joint responsibility for the protection of refugees in Latin America and the Caribbean was created. The author defines this cooperation as multilateral humanitarian diplomacy aimed at protecting persons displaced as a result of armed conflicts and massive violence in the region, mainly in Central America. The main milestones in the development of regional humanitarian diplomacy related to the establishment of principles and standards for resolving crisis situations with refugees are highlighted.

In recent non-international armed conflicts in countries such as the Central African Republic, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen, various non-State armed groups (NSAGs) have exercised control over territory and people living therein. In many cases, and for a variety of reasons, NSAGs perform some form of governance in these territories, which can include the maintenance of order or the provision of justice, health care, or social services. The significance of such measures became particularly apparent when in 2020 not only governments but also armed groups took steps to halt the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines key legal issues that arise in these contexts. First, it analyzes the extent to which international humanitarian law protects the life and dignity of persons living under the control of NSAGs, rebutting doubts as to whether this field of international law has a role in regulating what is sometimes called “rebel governance”. Second, it provides a brief overview of aspects of the lives of people in armed group-controlled territory that are addressed by international humanitarian law and aspects that instead fall into the realm of human rights law. Third, the article discusses whether and to what extent human rights law can be said to bind NSAGs as a matter of law and flags issues that need further attention in current and future debates. © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the ICRC

The UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) has closed hundreds of investigations into alleged ill-treatment of detainees by British troops in Iraq. This article probes one reason given for the closure of these investigations: the assertion (without further evidence) that the allegations were ‘less serious’, ‘lower-level’ or in the ‘middle’ range of severity. These terms usually appear without reference to international law, and are once defined with reference to the English criminal law of assault, so that investigations were closed if the alleged treatment resulted in less than grievous bodily harm. The MOD's terminology is wrong-headed and conceptually underinclusive: it fails to grasp the threshold of inhuman or degrading treatment in international human rights law (IHRL), and largely neglects the investigatory obligations in IHRL, international humanitarian law (IHL) and international criminal law (ICL).

Established in 2018, the Airspace Tribunal is a people’s tribunal that is examining the case for and against the recognition of a proposed new human right to live without physical or psychological threat from above. Drawing on the Airspace Tribunal’s first two hearings in London and Sydney, this article explains the Tribunal’s purpose and discusses the nature of the proposed right, why it is considered necessary, how it should be created and how it could strengthen international humanitarian law. It contends that a particuarly compelling argument in favour of the proposed right's recognition is the psychological impact on civilians of threats experienced from or through airspace. With further hearings planned in other parts of the world, the article concludes by emphasising that the Airspace Tribunal’s aim is to facilitate, continue and develop the vital conversation about protecting human dignity and promoting the universality of human rights in the face of growing threats to our existence.

The law of armed conflict requires ‘distinction’ between civilians and combatants and provides that only the latter may be targeted. However, for proper implementation, distinction requires advanced observation and recognition abilities as well as the capacity to exercise judgement based on situational awareness. While the observation and recognition abilities of machines may now surpass those of humans, the capacity of machines to exercise judgement remains significantly more limited than our own. Consequently, this article contends that the deployment of ‘autonomous weapons’ based on current levels of technological sophistication would be incompatible with distinction and that, as such, their use in conflict would be unlawful.

Legal research aims to solve the problems that arise in connection with the application of the principle of distinction (distinction principle) in terms of the protection of civilians in international armed conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. The object of study in legal research is devoted to applying the principle of distinction against the civilian population as a victim of war under international humanitarian law in armed conflict international. To solve these problems, they need to be supported by the data in the form of legal material. The data was obtained through the study of literature and via the Internet. From this legal research to achieve results that provide answers to the problems that exist, the Israeli aggression on Palestine has violated international humanitarian law provisions and has caused misery for the Palestinian population. As a result of these actions, the Israelis may be subject to liability in the form of sanctions or punishment according to international humanitarian law provisions applicable in the international community

The article examines the features of the formation and development of the institution of legal advisers in the armed forces, its place in the mechanism of implementation of international humanitarian law, the status, tasks and functions of legal advisers in the context of international obligations, in the comparative legal aspect and in the legislation of Ukraine. It is indicated that the military’s awareness of international humanitarian law, with the complication of its normative part after the Second World War and especially with the preparation of theAdditional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, has actualized the problem of qualified interpretation and clarification of the provisions of international humanitarian law precisely on its application by the military during an armed conflict.Analyzing Art. 82 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions 1949 of June 8, 1977, entitled “Legal Advisers in the Armed Forces”, right, the author defines that legal advisers have a dual function: they advise commanders on the correct application of the Conventions and Additional Protocol I, and advise these commanders on the training of armed forces personnel under their command.The author argues that it is legal advisers in the armed forces (military lawyers, legal advisers) who perform two main functionsin the implementation of international humanitarian law in the armed forces (disseminating knowledge about international humanitarian law and explaining the provisions of international humanitarian law to commanders directly in the process of its application in the conduct of hostilities).The author definesthat the institution oflegal advisersin the armed forcesis an independent subsystem in the mechanism for the implementation of international humanitarian law at the domestic level, which is important for the effective application of international humanitarian law by the armed forces of the state, this is also associated with the speed of recognition of the relevant provision of the treaty international humanitarian law.

The paper critically explores those scenarios (hypothetical, but probable) in which armed conflicts take place in outer space. First, the problem regarding the definition and delimitation of outer space will be analyzed. In this regard, the reasons why there is no consensus among the States, and even within the scientific community, will be explained. Subsequently, the relevant branches (for the topic) of Public International Law will be introduced (International Space Law, International Humanitarian Law, and Ius ad Bellum) and their key regulations will be identified. At this point, the main reasons why International Humanitarian Law shall be applied in the event that an armed conflict develops in outer space will be explained taking into account PIL formal and auxiliary sources. Likewise, specific challenges, that result from the application of International Humanitarian Law in outer space, will be exposed and analyzed. These challenges include: (i) attacks on dual-use objects; (ii) the obligations of the parties to the conflict when there is human direct or physical participation; and (iii) the applicable regulations for the development and use of new weapons. For each problem raised, possible solutions based on the rules and principles of current law will be provided. Finally, the need for the eventual creation of a specific treaty to regulate the matter will be emphasized, in view of the unique nature of this type of conflict.

The article is dedicated to the overview of the scope and application of international prosecution on war crimes. Although theterm “war crimes” is not a new concept in international law, different approaches exist in defining the precise limits of it. War crimesare always considered as one of the primary challenges and pecularities minimizing the whole efficiency of international law. Nevertheless,not all known prosecutions on war crimes ended with success. In traditional international law war crimes are always related tomilitary or armed conflicts what may be international or non-international conflict. History of international humanitarian law demonstratesthat almost all of the military conflicts were associated with war crimes. However, international law was not able to buil upstrong judicial mechanisms for the prosecution of war crimes for a long time. Modern type of international prosecution over war crimescan be linked to military tribunals established after World War I. At the same time, we should not forget that most of war crimes committedbefore and during WWI still remain unpunished. These problems demand new conceptual approach to the understanding of warcrimes as well as methodology of international prosecution. We know that first military tribunals were of quasi-international character.Although modern international law contains fully international military tribunals, still there are a lot of cases of failure to punish warcrimes. We need to understand that being a type of international crimes against peace and humanity, war crimes can be committed outsidethe active period of war. Thus, there is a need to re-define again the scope and subject matter of war crimes. On the other hand,prosecution of war crimes should be studied apart from other international law violations, human rights in particular.

This article explores the issue of whether individuals who join enemy forces during international armed conflicts are entitled to prisoner of war status upon capture. It presents the long-running debate on the topic through a study of divided scholarly opinions and judicial decisions. An original analysis of the competing theories is conducted on the basis of available state practice, treaty interpretation methodology, and novel critical arguments and proposals. The article seeks to challenge the value attributed to mainstream academic opinions and judicial precedents and open the debate in an area of international humanitarian law that is still under development.

In 2019, media investigations revealed that Israel had added facial recognition technologies (FRTs) to the panoply of security and surveillance technologies deployed in its administration and control of the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt). Despite growing academic and judicial scrutiny of the legal implications of these technologies for privacy and freedom of assembly in domestic contexts, scant attention has been paid to their uses by militaries in contexts where international humanitarian law (IHL) applies. This article seeks to establish the international legal framework governing an Occupying Power's deployment of FRTs, particularly in surveillance, and apply it to Israel's uses in the oPt. It is demonstrated that IHL provides flexible, but incomplete, provisions for balancing an Occupying Power's right to employ surveillance technologies within its measures of control and security against the imprecisely defined humanitarian interests of the population under occupation. The relevant legal framework is completed through the concurrent application of an Occupying Power's international human rights law (IHRL) obligations. What is known of Israel's use of FRTs in surveillance appears prima facie not to satisfy the cumulative IHRL criteria for limitations on the right to privacy – legality, legitimate aims, necessity and proportionality – even where these are broadened by reference to IHL. Consideration is also paid to corollary human rights impacts of these technologies, and the potential that they may entrench an Occupying Power's control while simultaneously rendering this control more invisible, remote and less reliant on the physical presence of troops.

La justicia transicional es la herramienta jurídico-política que implementa un Estado, en virtud de su soberanía y en cumplimiento de sus obligaciones internacionales, destinado a investigar, judicializar y sancionar penalmente, si fuere el caso, a los presuntos máximos responsables de violaciones graves a los Derechos Humanos o graves infracciones al Derecho Internacional Humanitario, de forma excepcional y bajo garantías procesales reales. Su literatura relacionada es amplia, en cuanto a la conceptualización, y existen definiciones que van desde lo jurídico hasta lo sociológico y antropológico, pasando también por los diferentes escenarios políticos y académicos, a la par de su aplicación práctica, en prioridad de la justicia restaurativa y reparadora sobre la retributiva, con el propósito de superar la violencia generada en los territorios con casos de violaciones graves a los DD. HH. e infracciones al DIH. El presente documento es una revisión de dichos conceptos, su aplicación y perspectivas.

I acknowledge the Ngunnawal people as the traditional owners and custodians of the land on which we meet. I pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. I deeply respect and admire the ability of the Ngunnawal, and of many other Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, to have survived invasion and violent dispossession of their land and to have maintained the richness of their cultural, linguistic, legal and spiritual traditions. On the subject matter of my lecture, humanity as a constraint on the conduct of war, I acknowledge that many of our Aboriginal peoples were extended little, if any, humanity in the colonial violence to which they were subjected. This is certainly true of the frontier wars in my own State of Tasmania (Van Diemen’s Land) in the 1820s and 1830s which resulted in the near annihilation of Aboriginality in the colony. Social Darwinism influenced the justificatory view that the Aboriginal people of Van Diemen’s Land were not only an obstacle to the settlement enterprise but that in their ‘savage’ state they were sub-human and doomed to extinction.

This article examines the role of international humanitarian law (ihl) and humanitarian principles in the discourse of humanitarian negotiation. The article is based on extensive, semi-structured interviews conducted with 53 humanitarian practitioners about their experiences engaging in negotiations in the field. The article proceeds in four parts. Part 1 discusses two key factors at play during humanitarian negotiation processes. The first factor is the counterpart’s familiarity with relevant legal and normative frameworks. The second factor is the interests that can drive counterparts’ behavior. Part 2 presents a framework for understanding how the interaction of these two factors – familiarity and interest-alignment – can shape the discourse of humanitarian negotiation. Part 3 addresses the impact of these same issues on the humanitarian side of the negotiation. In particular, there is the possibility that humanitarian actors themselves might also lack familiarity with ihl and/or humanitarian principles and might find that their interests exist in tension with humanitarian laws and principles. The final section offers concluding remarks.

Does international law matter on the periphery, where potential subjects are marginalized with uncertain legal status and without lawmaking power? Under what conditions would international law matter among the actors on the periphery, to be accepted as law, remain relevant, and eventually be complied with? By adopting an interdisciplinary perspective from international law and international relations, this article assesses how international humanitarian law (ihl) is accepted and adhered to among the non-state armed actors (nsaas). The author argues that international law matters on the periphery when two conditions are met. The first is when incentives of nsaas are compatible with ihl’s goal of restraint. The second is when the interpretation of ihl at the local level is consistent with international law at the global level. This article provides ample examples of nsaas’ words and deeds to illustrate the arguments.

While presenting the landscape of contemporary insecurities, the authors investigate the latest legislative concepts of the European Union’s concepts of security, policing and border management from the lenses of Regulations 2016/1624 and 2019/1896 on the European Border and Coast Guard, Common Security and Defence Policy, European Global Security Strategy and the UN Global Com-pact on Migration.In an attempt to holistically assess the implemented concepts of police control and border criminology, above all through the prism of the innovation of integrated border and migration management, both in European and global terms, they analyse in detail the powers of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency, especially with regard to their interoperability, international and interinstitutional cooperation.They point out as well the untapped potential of the formation of a new border police force. The insufficiently constituted cooperation of the Border Guard Agency with the Office of the Euro-pean public Prosecutor limits the effectiveness of the activities of both institutions, i.e. to combat terrorist offences, trans-border trafficking of people and goods, or even to control so-called foreign fighters.Strengthening cooperation and synergies between judicial and law enforcement agencies and the European External Action Service, providing the formation with the necessary intelligence and military competence is suggested by the authors.Particular attention was devoted to the need for appropriate needs, adaptable to change — for-mation and investigative-military training, as well as education on international humanitarian law and human rights, so that the border police may carry out their duties in an effective yet humani-tarian manner.Describing the proposed innovation in policing, not limited to operational and investigative activities, but rightly covering modern intelligence and digital/cyber profiling, among others, the au-thors consider a formally established close cooperation between EU Border Guards and the EU Pub-lic Prosecutor alongside the formalisation of the obligation to provide sincere and full cooperation from other EU countries to combat cross-border and terrorist related offences as a very much needed and desired axiomatic milestone in EU legislation. The authors provide a number of suggestions that may contribute to humanitarian, effective, and innovative border and migration management, and the fight against transnational organised crime and irregular migration phenomena.

Ceasefire agreements are legally governed by international humanitarian law because they have generally been considered in relation to how they affect levels of violence. However, new research in the fields of anthropology, security, and development studies suggests that ceasefires can have many more ramifications. These range from their ability to influence governance institutions, property and citizenship rights, economic networks, and security mechanisms. Consequently, this article suggests that a broader legal framework is needed through which to consider ceasefires and their consequences. While canvassing the option of ceasefires being types of contractual documents or as special agreements under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, the article concludes that the best way to regulate ceasefire agreements is through an expanded version of lex pacificatoria. Rather than being governed by hard international law, such a move would allow for the implementation of more flexible programmatic standards to influence the myriad ways ceasefires are negotiated, the conduct of belligerents, and their diverse effects on the ground during wartime.