No description available.

No description available.

Originally presented as the author's Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Cambridge Faculty of Law. / Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (p. [215]-247) and index.

Originally presented as the author's thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Cambridge Faculty of Law. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [215]-247) and index.

This dissertation analyses the domestic implementation of the repression of violations of International Humanitarian Law. Through this analysis it seeks to clarify the obligations placed on States under International Humanitarian Law to ensure an effective and workable system for the repression of violations. In assessing these obligations, this dissertation attempts to highlight the importance of an effective system that is properly implemented in a timely manner. It is shown that the obligations placed on States are not burdensome and are outweighed by the advantages of proper implementation. This dissertation demonstrates these advantages through a case study of Uganda where the consequences of the failure to implement an effective system of repressions of violations of International Humanitarian Law are documented. Practical solutions that may assist in remedying the defective system to repress violations in Uganda are provided. It is argued not only for the need to properly implement an effective system of repression of violations, as required under International Humanitarian Law, but for the need to implement a system that goes beyond that which States are legally obliged to do. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2013. / Public Law / unrestricted

Magister Philosophiae - MPhil / The purpose of this mini-thesis is to address International Humanitarian Law (IHL) violations occurring within the Occupied Palestinian Territories relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war. Importantly, various IHL violations that occur within the Green Line will be expanded upon. The mini-thesis will shed light on the lack of international action, specifically the inaction of the UN and the ICRC, in ending the decades of IHL violations by both the Israeli and Palestinian forces. As a means to an end, further destruction of property and loss of life that inhibits the quality of life of Palestinians and Israeli citizens trapped within the ongoing conflict, this mini-thesis will endeavour to provide solutions to ending the occupation. These solutions include: a UN Resolution directed toward the demolition of the wall; establishing permanent means of access to all basic needs; and lastly, addressing the influence of the United States of America (USA) and Egypt, respectively.

Journalists reporting from conflict zones are increasingly at risk of injury or death. Not only are they at risk of becoming a casualty in the crossfire, they are now often directly targeted and killed because of their profession. The legal framework protecting journalists in conflict zones consists predominantly of International Humanitarian Law, supplemented by International Human Rights Law and International Criminal Law. The main body of law providing protection to journalists consists of the Geneva Conventions and their additional Protocols, which are now several decades old. Since their drafting, there have been significant changes in the way we conduct wars, as well as in the way journalists operate and report from conflict zones. This raises the question whether this legal framework is still suitable for the protection of journalists in contemporary conflicts. This thesis confirms that the legal framework contains, at least in theory, a significant number of provisions that continue to provide protection for journalists in conflict zones. What is clear, however, is that there are significant differences in the protection awarded to journalists based on the type of journalist, for example whether they are embedded or function independently in conflict zones, the type of conflict they are covering and even their nationality. The result is a rather complicated legal framework that is not always easy to apply in practice. It has been argued by the International Committee of the Red Cross, a view also reflected in most of the academic literature, that the protection offered by the current legal framework is adequate, but that the enforcement of it is lacking. This is considered the predominant reason why journalists reporting on conflicts currently face such significant risks to their safety. While this is clearly part of the problem, this thesis challenges the notion that the legal framework provides all necessary protection and that only through stronger enforcement can protection be increased. In particular, it suggests that this ignores the effect that clarity and the comprehensiveness of the framework can have on enforcement. Having explored the gaps and limitations in the existing law, this thesis sets out the case for introducing a dedicated convention for the protection of journalists in conflict zones in order to clarify and streamline the current legal framework.

No description available.

This thesis provides a criminological perspective on the Australian state???s responses to unauthorised migrants. In particular, it attempts to build on recent criminological literature on state crime by contrasting the alleged deviance of unauthorised migrants with the organised and deviant human rights abuses perpetrated by the Australian state. The main argument of the thesis is that through the systematic alienation, criminalisation and abuse of unauthorised migrants, particularly refugees, the Australian state is engaged in state crime. While this can partly be measured by breaches of international humanitarian law, the acts in question are criminal according to the broader sociological understanding of state crime as ???state organisational deviance involving the violation of human rights???. The thesis develops this argument by locating the phenomena of forced and illicit migration within an increasingly globalised world economy in which the needs for international human migration are confronted by the restrictive migration policies of the dominant Western states. In this context, the Australian state has played a pivotal role in the development of three major Western exclusion zones, which are designed to contain unauthorised migrants in the developing world and are enforced by measures that systematically abuse human rights. The fundamental criminological dynamic of the Australian exclusion zone is its systematic assault on the movements and by definition, the rights, of forced migrants. This operates at a number of levels: unauthorised arrivals are alienated by their lack of legal status; they are denied access to a full refugee determination process; their status as refugees is subordinated to that of the resettled refugee; their experiences are denied and delegitimised through their construction as queue jumpers; they are criminalised through their participation in smuggling enterprises; they are punished and abused through the use of detention, dispersal and forced removal; and they are put at greater personal risk by the measures employed to enforce the zone. The thesis traces the development of this zone from the formation of the white Australia policy through to the Pacific Solution and critically analyses the ways in which current policy draws on and reinforces the exclusionist traditions of Australian nationalism.

This thesis makes the case for eliminating the distinction between types of armed conflict under international humanitarian law (IHL). Currently, IHL makes the distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts. International armed conflicts are regulated by more treaties than their non-international counterparts. Furthermore, the regulation of international armed conflicts is also considerably more comprehensive than that offered for participants in and victims of non-international armed conflicts. This bifurcation of the law was logical at the time the Geneva Conventions of 1949 were drafted and adopted, as the majority of armed conflicts prior to that point had been international in character. However, in the years following the adoption of the Conventions, there has been a proliferation of non-international armed conflicts, which presents challenges to a body of law that has few tools to adequately address such occurrences. The adoption of the Additional Protocols in 1977 went some way to addressing the legal lacunae that existed, but significant gaps still remain. Mindful this history, this thesis tracks the growth and evolution of the laws of armed conflict in the modern era, since the first document of the laws of war produced for the American Civil War. In doing so, this thesis demonstrates how the law of armed conflict has become increasingly harmonised in its application, with more rules of IHL being generally applicable in all instances of armed conflict, regardless of characterisation. This thesis then makes the argument that the time has come for the final step to be taken, the elimination of the distinction between types of armed conflict, and the complete harmonisation of the laws of war. Focusing specifically on the issue of combatants and POWs in armed conflicts, this thesis draws on considerable legal precedent, legal theory, and policy arguments to make the case that it is time for the law relating to the regulation of armed conflicts to be more uniformly applied.