The aim of this thesis is to answer the question whether the U.S. policy on targeted killings with combat drones is compatible with the legal doctrine of just war theory, applicable international law, and human rights law. Moreover, this paper intends to examine the legal issues arising from the U.S. practice of international law in relation to the justification of targeted killings. The purpose of this thesis is to determine whether the practice of targeted killings can be considered lawful and, if not, to provide knowledge about how the method violates applicable international law and the ethics of war. The focus is placed on relevant treaties and customary international law, and just war theory is used as a theoretical complement to explain the meaning and purpose of selected laws in order to determine their applicability to the research problem. Furthermore, this procedure has been conducted by using a legal method to identify the legal problem and interpret relevant sources of law in order to determine their applicability to the research problem. The thesis has determined that the U.S. policy on targeted killings with combat drones is not consistent with applicable international law and fundamental human rights law. In particular, the practice of targeted killings violates the principle of distinction.

An important change wrought by the post-1994 South African Constitutions is the attempt to have South Africa recognised as a democratic and sovereign state in the "family of nations." The new Constitutions make extensive reference to the state's international obligations and represent an endeavour to [re]define the status of international law vis-a-vis national law. Some provisions utilise international law in the interpretation and formulation of national jurisprudence and represent an [albeit not totally successful] endeavour to attain greater harmonisation between international and national law. This is an attempt to systematize the various criticisms levelled against these provisions to date, and to highlight certain interpretational difficulties and problems that present themselves in the process. The distinction between the various terminologies and branches of international law is also taken to task. Lastly, this paper attempts to determine the extent to which international law is applied at national level under the post-1994 constitutions. / Jurisprudence / LL. M.

At the United Nations Conference on International Organization in April 1945 South Africa affirmed the principle of respect for human rights in a Preamble it proposed for inclusion in the Charter of the United Nations. The proposal was approved and the Preamble was accorded binding force. While South Africa participated in the earliest attempts of the United Nations to draft a bill of rights, it abstained on the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights because its municipal legislation was incompatible with some articles. Similarly, South Africa did not become a party to the international human rights instruments the declaration inspired, and avoided an active role in their elaboration. Subsidiary organs of the General Assembly undertook several studies on discrimination in the field of human rights. They provided evidence that racial discrimination in South Africa intensified after the National Party came to power in May 1948 on the platform of apartheid and diverged from global trends in humanitarian law. The gap between the Union and the United Nations widened. At the first General Assembly in 1946, India successfully asked that the treatment of persons of Indian origin in South Africa be inscribed on the agenda. The Indian question was later subsumed in the charge that South Africa's racial policies violated the Charter and in 1952 the General Assembly began to discuss apartheid. South Africa protested that these actions contravened Charter Article 2(7), which prohibited intervention in matters of domestic jurisdiction, and were ultra vires. Criticism of the Union increased in intensity, until in 1960 it culminated in calls for economic and diplomatic sanctions. Research shows that South Africa was the main architect of its growing isolation, since it refused to modify domestic policies that alienated even its potential allies. Moreover, it maintained a low profile in United Nations debates on human rights issues, abstaining on all substantive clauses in the two draft covenants on human rights. These actions were interpreted as lack of interest in global humanitarian affairs. South Africa had little influence on the development of customary international law in the field of human rights but was a catalyst in the evolution of international machinery to protect them. / Jurisprudence / (LL.D)

On October 1, 1990 the Rwandan Patriotic Front launched a war from and with the support of the Republic of Uganda against Rwanda. This war was accompanied by unspeakable violations of International Humanitarian Law. Both conflicting parties violated the basic rules protecting the civilian population in situations of armed conflicts. The United Nations Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of its Charter, passed resolution 955 of November 8, 1994 establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda to prosecute alleged responsible of such violations. This study investigates the background of the ICTR and questions the nature of the conflict that prompted the Security Council to establish another ad hoc international criminal tribunal after the one established for the former Yugoslavia. It further inquires into its jurisprudence and reflects critically on the ICTR's approach to serious violations of IHL under Article 3 Common to the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II. / Jurisprudence / LL. M. (Law)

"Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit - option recherche(LL.M)" / Ce mémoire traite de la contribution du Tribunal pénal international pour l'ex-Yougoslavie (« TPIY ») au développement des sources formelles du droit international public. Il considère, plus précisément, le dilemme normatif entre le droit international classique, polarisé sur l'État et « résorbé» dans une juridicité formelle, et le «droit de l'unité substantiel », codifiant le mythe kantien de la paix par le droit et associant juridicité et légitimité par une intégration de l'éthique dans le droit. L'analyse postule la rétroaction du droit sur ses sources et étudie les courants idéologiques du droit international contemporain à partir de la jurisprudence du TPIY. Le mémoire conclut à une rupture entre le discours rhétorique du TPIY sur les sources, se réclamant du droit international classique, davantage compatible avec le principe de légalité, et les pratiques normatives effectives du Tribunal, ressemblant à un jusnaturalisme moderne, fondé sur des valeurs morales et éthiques. / This thesis studies the contribution by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former- Yugoslavia ("ICTY") to the development of Public International Law. Specifically, it analyses the normative dilemma between sources ofClassic International Law - correlated to the will ofStates, as wel/ as legal formalism - and the "International law ofsubstantial unity" - which codifies the Kantian myth of ''peace by law" and moves the classic idea of legality from formalism to legitimacy by using ethical references. The analysis assumes Law's retroactive effect on its sources and considers ideological movements of Contemporary International Law in the jurisprudence of the ICTY. The thesis concludes to a clash between ICTYabstractfindings related to sources ofInternationallaw and the actual "day-by-day" normative practices ofthe Tribunal. While the first brings into play Classic International Law and the rule of law, the second looks more like a neo-naturalism, fashioned by moral and ethical values.

Le Conseil de sécurité est l’organe principal du système onusien chargé du maintien de la paix et de la sécurité internationales. Face à une situation illégale, il ne peut donc l’ignorer et s’en désintéresser. Cependant, la perpétration d’un acte à la légalité controversée par l’un ou plusieurs de ses membres permanents peut nous laisser entendre que l’organe politique onusien aura des difficultés à remplir son rôle. Les membres permanents vont tenter d’instrumentaliser le Conseil de sécurité afin de diminuer l’illégalité de la situation. Ceci pose avec acuité le problème du contrôle de son activité en matière de maintien de la paix. L’accomplissement d’un acte illégal par un ou plusieurs membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité nécessite alors de réfléchir à des moyens d’ordre juridique pour limiter son pouvoir. Cette réflexion s’avère particulièrement pressante lorsque le Conseil est confronté à une occupation de guerre impliquant ses membres permanents ou, lorsqu’il crée ou autorise des opérations de paix de grandes envergures suite à un conflit armé impliquant ses membres permanents. Afin de limiter les prérogatives du Conseil de sécurité, le régime juridique de l’occupation tel qu’énoncé par le Règlement de La Haye (IV) de 1907 et la IVe Convention de Genève de 1949 devrait être appliquer par l’organe politique onusien lorsqu’il intervient dans une situation d’occupation de guerre impliquant ses membres permanents. L’objectif est d’éviter qu’il n’attribue aux puissances occupantes des missions qui dépassent le cadre juridique imposé par le droit des conflits armés. L’autorisation, par le Conseil de sécurité d’opérations de paix, telles qu’une administration civile transitoire ou une force multinationale avec un mandat de la paix avec recours à la force armée, suite à un conflit armé impliquant ses propres membres permanents, ouvre le débat sur leur réglementation. Alors, il sera proposé une interprétation progressiste de la définition de l’occupation telle qu’énoncée par le Règlement de La Haye (IV) de 1907 et la IVe Convention de Genève de 1949 afin d’y intégrer ces nouvelles formes d’occupations pacifiques, présentant de grandes similitudes avec les occupations de guerre. Ainsi, le régime juridique de l’occupation pourra leur être appliqué. / The Security Council is the primary body of the UN system responsible for peacekeeping and international security. In cases of violations of international law, the Security Council cannot turn a blind eye. Nevertheless, in cases when Security Council members are themselves perpetrators of international law violations one could conclude that this political body has difficulties in fulfilling its mandate. The danger exists that Security Council members in violation of international law will implicate the Security Council in justifying illegal decisions. This therefore raises the question of Security Council accountability. The violation of international law by a Security Council member therefore requires a legal mechanism to limit the powers of this body. This is particularly relevant for cases of occupation involving its permanent members, or, when the Security Council creates or authorizes large-scale peace-keeping operations following an armed conflict involving its own members. In order to limit the powers of the Security Council, this study proposes to impose a legal regime of administration as stipulated by the IV (1907) Hague and the 4th 1949 Geneva Convention, according to which the Security Council intervenes when a territory is administered by one of its permanent members. The goal is to avoid that the Security Council gives too much freedom to an administrative power during interventions which go beyond the legal framework defined by the law on administrated territories. The authorization by the Security Council of peace-keeping operations, such as transitional civil administration or multinational peace-keeping force mandated to use force, following an armed conflict involving its own members, opens the debate of their regulation. Consequently a progressive interpretation of occupation as defined by the IV (1907) Hague and the 4th 1949 Geneva Convention is proposed in order to encompass new forms of peaceful occupations which contain clear similarities with military occupations. Thus, they will fall under the legal mechanism of the latter.

Conflit présenté comme gelé, la guerre du Haut-Karabagh n’en est pas moins réelle, s’inscrivant dans une géopolitique régionale complexe et passionnante, nécessitant de s’intéresser à l’histoire des peuples de la région, à l’histoire des conquêtes et politiques menées concomitamment. Comprendre les raisons de ce conflit situé aux limites de l’Europe et de l’Asie, comprendre les enjeux en cause, que se soit la problématique énergétique ou l’importance stratégique de la région du Caucase à la fois pour la Russie mais également pour les Etats-Unis ou l’Union Européenne ; autant de réflexions que soulève cette recherche. Au delà, c’est l’influence réciproque du droit international et du politique qui sera prise en compte, notamment concernant l’échec des négociations actuelles. Les difficultés d’application du droit international à ce conflit sui generis se situent à plusieurs niveaux ; sur le statut de la région principalement, mais également sur les mécanismes de sanctions et de réparations devant s’appliquer aux crimes sur les personnes et les biens et qui se heurtent à la classification difficile du conflit. / The Nagorno-Karabagh conflict, often described as frozen, reveals the certainty of a war encompassed in complex regional geopolitics. To understand this complexity, one must look closer to the history of peoples, of conquests and of ruling politics over this region. Not only are to be understood the energy issues, but also the strategic importance regarding the interests of Russia, the United States or the European Union. Here is the purpose of this research. Also, the relationship between international law and politics is of a particular importance, especially regarding the difficulties of the current negotiations. The difficulties in regard of the application of international law to this sui generis conflict are to be seen at different levels; concerning the statute of the province, as well as the mechanisms of sanctions and compensations that must be applied over crimes on people and goods, facing the issue of the definition of this conflict.

La notion de participation directe aux hostilités n’a jamais été définie de manière précise au regard du droit international humanitaire. Cette ambiguïté a conduit à des interprétations divergentes du concept d’hostilités et des critères juridiques utilisés pour définir une participation directe par opposition à une participation indirecte (effort de guerre).D’ailleurs, les conflits contemporains posent de nouveaux défis quant à la définition et la mise en oeuvre de la notion de la participation directe aux hostilités. Les moyens de guerre de haute technicité (l’attaque de réseaux informatiques) et l’externalisation des forces armées (sociétés militaire privées), illustrent l’imbrication croissante des activités civiles et militaires et la difficulté à identifier précisément qui participe directement aux hostilités et quelles sont les mesures à prendre pour protéger ceux qui n’y participent pas directement. / The notion of direct participation in hostilities has never been precisely defined in international humanitarian law. This ambiguity has led to differing interpretations of the concept of hostilities and legal criteria imply a distinction from direct participation in hostilities as opposed indirect participation (war effort).Indeed, contemporary conflicts have given rise to further challenges in terms of defining and implementing the notion of direct participation in hostilities. The use of high-tech warfare (computer network attack), privatization of the armed forces (private military company), among others, illustrate the increased intermingling of civilian and military activities which make it difficult to determine who is taking a direct part in hostilities and what measures should be taken to protect those who are not directly participating.

La République Centrafricaine (RCA) ou Centrafrique, comme beaucoup de pays d’Afrique noire, amorce la mise en place d’un régime démocratique en 1990. Elle organise les élections multipartites dont le premier président démocratiquement élu est Ange Félix Patassé. Le cap de l’entrée en régime démocratique semble passé avec succès. Mais les vieilles méthodesrefont surface, occasionnant la contestation. En 1996 éclate une crise politico-militaire ponctuée par trois mutineries, puis une série de coups d’État. Elle atteint son apogée en 2013-2015 avec un conflit opposant deux communautés. C’est à la suite de ces événements que se fait le déploiement, en 1997, d’une force militaire de paix conformément aux « accords de Bangui » de 1997 : la Mission Interafricaine du Suivi des Accords de Bangui (MISAB). Elle marque le début d’une succession d’opérations destinées à maintenir ou rétablir la paix. Elle s’accompagne d’interventions humanitaires où le CICR et MSF jouent un rôle majeur. Cette recherche analyse ces actions de 1990 à 2015. Elle étudie dans la première partie le rôle des acteurs africains dans la résolution de ce conflit et dans la deuxième partie la participation des acteurs internationaux. / The Central African Republic (CAR) or Centrafrique, as many black African countries, begins the establishment of a democratic regime in 1990. It organized multi-party elections which the first democratically elected president is Ange Félix Patassé. The cap of the entrance to democratic regime seems past successfully. But the old methods resurface, causing protests. In 1996 bursts a politico-military crisis punctuated by three mutinies, then a succession of putsch. It reached its peaks in 2013-2015 with a conflict between two communities. It is following these events that are made the deployment in 1997, of a peacemilitary force according to the “agreements of Bangui” in 1997: The Inter-African of monitoring the agreements of Bangui (MISAB). It marks the beginning of a series of operations intended to maintain or to restore the peace. It goes along with humanitarian interventions where the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Doctors without borders (MSF) play a major role. This research analyzes these actions from 1990 to 2015. It studies in the first part the role of the African actors in the resolution of this conflict and in the second part the participation of the international actors.

La reconstruction post-conflit de l’Etat est un enjeu majeur et actuel des relations internationales. L’Union européenne, sous les auspices des Nations Unies contribue à restaurer ou instaurer un ordre étatique qui doit donner sa chance à une paix durable fondée sur des valeurs respectueuses des droits de l’homme. Toutefois, l’Union européenne reste maitre de ses interventions. Il n’existe pas véritablement pour les Etats post-conflits un droit à la reconstruction. Un complexe d’acteurs institutionnels européens décide et organise la réponse européenne à la déliquescence des Etats au sortir des conflits. Cette réponse n’est pas isolée, elle s’inscrit dans un ensemble de partenariats.L’organisation régionale déploie un ensemble de mécanismes juridiques ou opérationnels, militaires ou civils de gestion du relèvement des Etats en sortie de conflit. L’engagement européen peut prendre des formes très intrusives, et s’apparente parfois à une tutelle européenne sur des Etats victimes de conflits. Au final, l’Union européenne participe à la définition et à la réalisation d’un droit international de la reconstruction de l’Etat. Elle consacre des normes et des standards internationaux. Elle inaugure des normes et des standards européens adaptées au relèvement des Etats. De ce point de vue, l’offre européenne en matière de reconstruction post conflit de l’Etat est globale. C'est-à-dire que l’Europe propose de reconstruire l’Etat sous ses trois composantes traditionnelles : la population, le territoire et l’appareil d’Etat. / In the framework of International Relations, Post Conflict Reconstruction of the State is a major and actual stake. European Union under the auspices of United Nations, supports all initiatives to restore or build a state order which give a chance for a stable peace based on human values. Nevertheless, European Union defines his interventions in function of his own interests. Post-conflicts States don’t have a right to reconstruction. A mix of european institutional actors decide and design the european response dedicated to failed Post-conflict States. This response is not isolated, she is included in a network of parternship.After a conflict, the regional organization set up a mix of legal or operational mechanisms, and military or civilian capacities. The european activism in this domain can be very strong. Sometimes, it seems as a trusteeship of EU on Post conflicts States. Consequently, European Union contributes to design and implement the international law of the State reconstruction. EU promotes norms and international standards. It initiates european norms and standards dedicated to the recovery of states. Consequently, European Union possess global capacities in the matter of post-conflict reconstruction. That is to say that Europe is proposing to rebuild the state in its three traditional components: population, territory and state apparatus.