"Ideally, peacekeeping operations demonstrate the concern of the international community in situations of instability or conflict arising between or within states. They are conceived to bring about peace and 'ensure the effective promotion and protection of [human] rights'. As a result, peacekeeping operations as well as peacekeepers are expected to comply with standards of human rights and humanitarian law. With respect to the Economic Community of West African States Cease-Fire Monitoring Group (ECOMOG), its intervention in Liberia, Sierra Leone, Guinea Bissau, and Côte d'Ivoire have been generally welcomed as a response to barbaric and devastating wars in West Africa. However, the observation of ECOMOG missions reveals several instances of violations of human rights and humanitarian law committed by ECOMOG peacekeepers. These violations include attacks against civilians, summary executions, rapes, torture, looting, etc. In other words, the saviours have turned into violators of rights. While these violations have provoked concern and indignation, few measures have been taken to address the problem, hold peacekeepers accountable and prevent abuses in the future. ... This study is divided into five chapters. Chapter one provides, among other, the background of the study, the statement of the research problem and the significance of the study. Chapter two gives an insight into the creation, structure, mechanisms and evolution of ECOMOG as the peacekeeping organ of ECOWAS. Chapter three examines the basis for the applicability of human rights and international humanitarian law to peacekeepers and shows the violations committed by the ECOMOG peacekeepers since 1990. Chapter four analyses the responses to abuses committed by ECOMOG peacekeepers. It discusses the national, regional and universal responses to these abuses. It investigates both prevention and accountability mechanisms existing to address abuses committed by ECOMOG peacekeepers. It also explores some potential accountability and prevention mechanisms. Finally, chapter five makes some concluding remarks and suggests specific recommendations for the improvement of the existing responses." -- Introduction. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2004. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

Mot bakgrund av den tidigare forskning och kritik kring ämnet digitala krigsspel har denna studie identifierat omfattningen av internationell humanitär rätt (IHL) i speltitlarna Call of Duty: Modern Warfare och This War of Mine samt diskuterat de etiska synpunkter som uppenbarats genom närläsning. Resultaten visar att dessa speltitlar skiljer sig i sin skildring av krig sett utifrån IHL. This War of Mine avbildar krig genom ett civilt perspektiv och genom sitt narrativ tar spelet ingen ställning till någon sida utan förmedlar, genom sina porträtteringar av brott mot IHL, den allvarsamma realiteten av krig. I kontrast till detta ställer sig Call of Duty: Modern Warfare på en sida av rättfärdigande av krig mot de makter som hotar den fria världen genom våldshandlingar som brott mot IHL, detta porträtteras genom både ett militärt och därtill civil perspektiv. Vidare har denna studie identifierat frågor vi anser vara av stort intresse för framtida forskning inom digitala krigsspel. / In the light of previous research and criticism on the subject of digital war games, this study has identified the scope of international humanitarian law (IHL) in the game titles Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and This War of Mine and discussed the ethical views revealed through close reading. The results show that these game titles differ in their depiction of war seen from the IHL. This War of Mine depicts war through a civilian perspective and through its narrative, the game takes no position on either side but conveys, through its portrayals of crimes against the IHL, the serious reality of war. In contrast, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare stands on one side of justifying war against the powers that threaten the free world through acts of violence as a crime against the IHL, this is portrayed through both a military and a civilian perspective. Furthermore, this study has identified issues we consider to be of great interest for future research in digital war games.

práce je analyzovat dodržování základních pravidel mezinárodního Hlavní výzkumná otázka zní: "Inklinuje slabší či silnější těchto konfliktů k porušování povinností MHP více než ta druhá?" Hypotéza stanoví, že se slabší strany uchylují k porušování pravidel MHP více než jejich silnější protivníci. zpracována metodou komparativní případové studie ilně vyložena a operacionalizována na zkoumané případy aplikovatelná pravidla MHP. Těmi jsou společný článek 3 Ženevských úmluv, zásada vojenské nutnosti, zásada rozlišování, zásada proporcionality a zásada zakazující zbytečné útrapy. Následně je na základě údajů uvedených mezinárodních databázích ozbrojených konfliktů a rovněž informací získaných z odborných publikací proveden rozbor dodržování aplikovatelných norem MHP. Tento odhalil, že se porušování základních pravidel dopouštěly všechny strany zvolených konfliktů. Nebylo tak prokázáno, že by se slabší či silnější strany dopouštěly porušování více než jejich protivníci, čímž byla původní hypotéza vyvrácena. Bylo také zjištěno, že ačkoli byla v konfliktu stranami do jisté míry porušována stejná pravidla MHP, dělo se tak odlišným západosaharském konfliktu byla oběma stranami porušována stejná pravidla, a to jednáním totožným.

In the performance of law enforcement tasks, military forces frequently use expanding bullets. Such bullets are prohibited in international armed conflicts (IAC:s) by treaty, but in non-international armed conflicts (NIAC:s), the matter is regulated by the principle prohibiting means and methods of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering (SIrUS), and possibly by an independent rule of customary international humanitarian law. This essay looks first to a proposed solution in which the law enforcement legal paradigm takes precedence, and finds such a solution incomplete and its application limited. It proceeds to look at the prohibition of expanding bullets in NIAC:s as an independent rule,exploring the formation of customary law, the evidence value of military manuals, expanding bullets as a war crime, and the ICTY Tadíc ruling. It finds the evidence of the existence of such a rule unconvincing. It then looks to principle of SIrUS and explores the best approaches for its interpretation and application. Ultimately, it argues that the military utility, in the form of stopping power and decreased risk of collateral injury, provided by expanding bullets is of such a scale and nature that the use of such bullets could reasonably be argued to pass the assessment as required by the principle. In light of this, the essay emphasises the need for treaty-based rules in order create effective weapons prohibitions, and that armed forces are still obliged to properly assess which set of rules govern the use of force.

Ce travail évalue la licéité des systèmes d’armes autonomes au regard du droit international humanitaire en utilisant le mécanisme d’examen juridique des nouvelles armes prévu à l’article 36 du Protocole additionnel I de 1977 additionnel aux Conventions de Genève de 1949 (Protocole I). Il aborde également la responsabilité internationale, tant individuelle qu’étatique, pour les crimes commis à l’aide de ceux-ci. Il examine finalement l’état des discussions internationales et la position juridique des États au sujet des systèmes d’armes autonomes. / This work assesses the legality of autonomous weapon systems under international humanitarian law using the legal review mechanism of new weapons under Article 36 of 1977 Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (Protocol I). It also addresses both individual liability and state accountability for crimes committed using autonomous weapon systems. Finally, it examines international discussions and the legal position of States regarding autonomous weapon systems.

The child soldier problem is an escalating and growing phenomenon around the world. It is a complex issue as it involves a wide range of areas such as human rights, politics and cultures. A comprehensive legal framework is in place to protect children in armed conflicts, yet they are still being targeted, recruited and deployed in armed groups and organizations. The purpose of this study is to conduct an exhaustive examination of current international law, de lege lata, regarding child soldiers aged 15-18. The legal-dogmatic method will be used to identify the merits, but above all the shortcomings and problems of the legislation. The result shows that international law treats children differently in terms of age and when they are no longer considered child soldiers. The findings demonstrate the difficulties between the two frameworks of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in relation to child rights and protection issues. Furthermore, it has been discovered that the international law regarding child soldiers is outdated, contradictory and inconsistent, as society and warfare have changed since the adoption of the documents. The lack of legal sanctions against recruiters and enablers complicates the situation even further.

In this thesis, I explore positions of power in transnational human rights education, using The Raoul Wallenberg Institute as example in a case study. I am interested to know how human rights knowledge is produced and transferred in a global system of human rights education. My research focuses on positions of power in this global system, on challenges   and practical solutions, and on if and how education can contribute to decolonisation processes. I analyse four interviews with employees at RWI, who are working with transnational human rights education. The interviews, and supporting formal documents published by RWI, are analysed through close textual analysis, organised by key topics of transnational human rights education. As a theoretical framework to understand knowledge transfer, I use Stone’s concept of policy translation. For a post-colonial perspective and as tool to understand claims for decolonising transnational human rights education, I use Spivak’s concept of the subaltern as well as her request for ethical reflection of Western privileges.   The conclusion of my thesis shows a firm commitment of RWI to localisation, with methods embedded in their concept of transnational human rights education. There are some, but few attempts by the Institute to reflect on their own position in a global system of power linked to the production and transfer of knowledge, which hinders attempts of decolonising transnational human rights education.

The negotiation process of a peace agreement is an uncertain period where adversaries can have a difficult time credibly guaranteeing their commitment to an approaching agreement. However, violence is often ceased before a peace agreement is signed, demonstrating their importance for understanding non-violent and violent behavior by warring actors. Furthermore, research finds that rebels at times comply with laws of war during conflict and negotiations. Hence, the purpose of this study is to derive a better understanding of rebel groups’ non-violent behavior, and whether it relates to the commitment problem and the negotiation process. This paper argues that by complying with international law, rebels can convey a signal with a peace-making objective, increasing the likelihood of a successful negotiation. Through a qualitative, structured and focused comparative case analysis of the FMLN in El Salvador and the NPFL in Liberia, the study finds that rebel’s compliance with IHL may serve as a costly signal that mitigates the credible commitment problem and leads to the signing of a successful peace agreement. However, further research is needed to support this hypothesis.

The thesis purports to assess the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in maintaining international peace and security and the International Criminal Court (ICC) in prosecuting individuals who have committed severe violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international law, during humanitarian and counter-terrorism operations. The thesis endeavours to highlight the failures of both institutions, firstly, the UNSC being unable to fulfil its institutional mandate, which is mainly attributed to the abuse of veto privileges granted to the five permanent members (P5). This has effectively allowed individuals from the militaries of the P5 and their allies elude criminal liability, promoting a culture of impunity. The UNSC’s failure to prevent P5 members use of unauthorised military force in pursuing counter-terrorism operations and interpose expeditiously in humanitarian crises, have also contributed to the erosion of the institutions’ legitimacy, which is further perpetuated by the USA’s continued ‘War on Terror’ doctrine after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Secondly, the ICC’s inability to prosecute individuals for crimes under the Rome Statute will also be highlighted as the principle of complementarity and the court’s inability to enforce arrest warrants are significant factors contributing to the institutions inability to administer international criminal justice. The thesis draws upon practical examples to substantiate the failures of both institutions by referring to the conflicts in: Afghanistan, Iraq, Palestine, Syria and Libya. Before concluding the UNSC and the ICC have become futile, the thesis will then make recommendations for reform and propose a novel solution to restore legitimacy back to both institutions.

Syftet med denna studie var att komma till insikt, dels om hur kriget mot terrorismen har präglat diskursen kring det rättfärdiga kriget med dess särskilt utmärkande preventiva krigföring, och dels om huruvida begreppet "illegal kombattant" kan betraktas som legalt eller inte. Denna studie visar hur krigskonceptet har blivit alltmer diffust sedan det kalla kriget och hur attackerna gentemot USA den elfte september 2001 innebar en brytpunkt gällande diskussionerna kring rättfärdig krigföring. Studien visar också att begreppet "illegal kombattant", med dess preventiva syfte, tillvisso skulle kunna betraktas som legitimt i kontext till omfattningen av ovan nämnda attacker men att dess innebörd inte kan betraktas som legalt i vare sig nationell eller internationell bemärkelse. Jag har kommit till denna insikt genom att identifiera en diskursiv företeelse och lyfta fram dess legalitets- och legitimitetsaspekter och genom att identifiera en juridisk företeelse och lyfta fram syftet med dess innebörd med fokus främst på dess legalitetsaspekter. Med en diskursanalys har jag undersökt talet om det rättfärdiga kriget efter den elfte september, och genom en juridisk analys har jag prövat begreppet "illegal kombattant" gentemot nationell och internationell rätt. Dessa två analyser har fogats samman genom en samlad studie av kriget mot terrorismen och dess legalitets- respektive legitimitetsaspekter. / The purpose of this study was to come to realization on how the war on terror has characterized the discourse on Just War with its particularly distinctive preventive warfare, and also on whether the term "unlawful combatant" can be regarded as legal or not. This study shows how the concept of war has become increasingly diffuse since the Cold War and how the attacks against the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001 represented an inflection point on the discussions of righteous warfare. The study also shows that the term "illegal combatant", with its preventive purposes, to a certain extent might be regarded as legitimate in the context of the magnitude of the above-mentioned attacks but that its content can not be regarded as legal in either a national or international sense. I have come to this realization by identifying a discursive phenomenon and highlighting its legality and legitimacy aspects and by identifying a legal phenomenon and highlighting the purpose and meaning of it, primarily focusing on its legality aspects. With a discourse analysis, I have examined the speach on Just War after September 11, and with a legal analysis, I have tested the notion of "unlawful combatant" against national and international law. These two analyzes have been consolidated in a comprehensive study of the war on terrorism and its legality and legitimacy aspects.