Search

This essay provides an interpretation of Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan by illustrating the fact that the provision was originally designed to require Japan to comply with contemporary international law. This essay thus criticizes the traditional interpretation of Japanese constitutional lawyers, who sought to emphasize the distinctiveness of the provision by ignoring its purpose. This essay emphasizes that Article 9 (1) is intended to reinforce the Kellogg ― Briand Pact of 1928 and the Charter of the United Nations of 1945. The Prohibition of “war potential” in Article 9 (2) should be understood in line with the first paragraph. “War” of “war potential” of the second paragraph is in the end the illegal action in contemporary international law. Thus, the second paragraph only indicates the prohibition of the possession of the means to conduct illegal actions. The renunciation of “the right of belligerency of the state” of Article 9 (2) is the provision of non-recognition of the illegal concept in the eyes of international law. Article 9 (2) only repudiates the claim in the wartime Japanese Empire against international law. In conclusion, Article 9 is the declaration of Japan to comply with contemporary international law and cannot be regarded as a provision to renounce the legitimate right of self-defense and the military means to exercise it., This essay is a revised version of the same author’s essay in Japanese language, 篠田英朗「現代国際法と日本国憲法の整合性の解明～従来の憲法学通説の 9 条解釈の問題点～」, in Hiroshima Peace Science 41 (2019) . While this essay is not a direct translation, the substance is almost identical.

application/pdf, 本稿は，平成29年12月13日に行われた香川大学法学会講演会の記録である。

This essay is intended to analyze the debate on the withdrawal from the ICC by African states. First, it examines the background of the debate. Second, it carefully looks at the contents of the Withdrawal Strategy Document by the AU. In so doing, this essay illustrates the nature of the issue as the dilemmas between politics and law, peace and justice, and regionalism and universalism. There is a general growing trend of multi-layered security structures of international society in relation to the principles of local ownership, empowerment and partnership. The essay argues that there is room for the ICC’s endeavors to advance “positive complementarity.”

This essay is intended to analyze the current state of UN peace operations by looking at the Report of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (HIPPO). The essay argues that the key messages of the HIPPO Report, primacy of politics and stronger partnership, even if less innovative, should be regarded as important reflections of contemporary international peace operations in the 21st century, the age of the War on Terror. In the end UN peace operations need to find their roles in international society by carefully examining their possible functions in reality.

Peacebuilding and the Ownership of Local Society in Sri Lanka

The Conflict situations in West Africa have been characterized by intra state conflicts and struggle for identity, recognition and legitimacy all of which are constant factors in promoting human security. In the midst of this strategic shift in security challenges within the sub region, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) operationalized an early warning system as a mechanism to support conflict prevention and peacebuilding. This process has been supported by member states, security sector structures and West Africa Network for Peace building (WANEP) that has the largest presence of civil society networks in the sub region. This article is an attempt to present an assessment of the operationalization of the ECOWAS early warning system looking at the historical context of the process and putting problems into perspectives. It also covers conceptual analysis of early warning and builds on its connection to early response and the initiatives that have been putforward so far in engendering the early warning system. The analysis covers the operational workings of the system, ECOWAS partnership with WANEP, and an overall review of the strength, opportunities, weaknesses and challenges in the ECOWAS early warning structure and its output in addressing security challenges in West Africa.

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) has recently drawn great attention in international society. With the end of the prolonged armed conflict, the case of Sri Lanka is often regarded as a contemporary critical case for R2P, since the government of Sri Lanka has been accused by Western sources in the international community for its alleged commitments to war crimes in the last phase of the war. This article argues that what the spirit of R2P really requires us to examine is how to protect victims in war-affected areas. R2P admits that the primary responsibility to protect citizens lies with the national government. While indentifying war crimes and punishing war criminals is a necessary action for the prevention of further atrocities in the future. However, it does not help victims directly. The international community is not exercising R2P by accusing the government, while there are many possibilities which both the international community and the government of Sri Lanka can pursue for the protection of people. The case of Sri Lanka would compel us to think more flexibly to achieve the goal of R2P.

This paper explores the importance of "ownership of local society" in the context of peacebuilding. While the principle of "local ownership" is well established in international society, its strategic implications in peacebuilding have not yet been fully examined. This paper first provides a systematic recognition of the importance of "ownership of local society" in the context of peacebuilding. The paper introduces the concepts of legitimacy, willingness, capacity, and activeness in order to illustrate the strategic thinking of peacebuilding to meaningfully develop "ownership of local society" in the context of peacebuilding. Then, second, the paper identifies major bearers of "ownership of local society" and examined their possibilities from the perspective of peacebuilding. The enriched concept of "ownership" should not exclusively exercised by the national government. Local administrations as well as civil society organizations also have crucial roles to play as implementers of "ownership of local society" in the context of peacebuilding. The third section of the paper illustrates the relevance of the issue in each of main policy areas of peacebuilding. By doing so, the paper aims to show how those who are engaged in peacebuilding should take into consideration the strategic importance of "ownership of local society" in the context of peacebuilding.

現代平和構築活動の視点から見た広島の戦後復興史

The principle of local ownership is an established doctrine in international society. It is so in the field of international peace operations or a wider area of international cooperation. However, there are difficulties in achieving the principle in reality. Particularly because recent international peace operations often take place in fragile states, the achievement of local ownership is a highly critical as well as difficult goal. The perspective of "capacity development" is often emphasized in the field of developmental aid and has also been referred to in peacebuilding activities. But as in developmental aid, capacity development programs for peacebuilding also face theoretical as well as practical difficulties. This paper takes the position that international peacebuilders should not and cannot abandon the principle of local ownership and the perspective of capacity development, while it is a matter of course that we need to take into consideration the limits and the difficulties in conducting peacebuilding in accordance with the principle and the perspective. The paper thus identifies and analyzes the nature and predicaments of the principle of local ownership in peacebuilding and then discusses what kind of policy implications for capacity development ought to be found as a result.

「国際平和活動における民軍関係の課題」第一部「民軍関係と学術研究」第1章

The principle of impartiality symbolizes the change in the doctrines of UN peacekeeping operations and also the shift of understanding of international order. The traditional UN PKO had a principle of neutrality. But in the 1990s there were serious failures of peacekeeping operations and there appeared cries for change in PKO doctrines. Secretary-General Kofi Annan intentionally distinguished between neutrality and impartiality in favor of the latter. The Brahimi Report and the Capstone Doctrine crystalized Annan’s initiative in defense of impartiality. The difference between neutrality and impartiality is one major issue in the 21st century. It can be noted that there is a change in understandings of international order behind the emergence of the principle of impartiality as a key doctrine of the shift in contents of UN PKOs. The paper argues that the principle of impartiality ushered in the spread of robust operations. Impartiality explains how UN PKOs accommodate new doctrines like protection of civilians (POC) and frequent use of Chapter VII authorities, since impartiality requires more principled peace operations based upon international normative standards of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. This paper then illustrates how the principle of impartiality is crucial in many recent cases of UN PKOs including UNAMID, MONUSCO, UNMISS, MINUSMA, MINUSCA.

This essay seeks to look at the case of “rule of law approach" of peacebuilding in Bosnia and Herzegovina from the perspective of the Report by the United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan concerning the rule of law in conflict and post-conflict societies. The first section of the essay carefully examines the contents of the Annan's Report issued in 2004. The second section provides an overview of “rule of law" related peacebuilding activities in Bosnia. The third section contemplates the implications of peacebuilding activities in Bosnia, given the issues raised by Annan's Report. The essay finds two characteristics in Bosnia that would explain the arguments in Annan's Report. One is a growing demand for domestic reforms in justice sectors. The other is growing recognition of strategic importance of the rule of law in comparison with other principles like democracy.