No description available.

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.

Thesis (L.L.M.)--Georgetown University, Law Center, 2001. / "30 April 2001." Includes bibliographical references. Also available via the Internet.

The present thesis attempts a critical examination of the theory of war under Islamic and public international law, in an effort to demonstrate that jihad is a just, defensive, and exceptional form of warfare, geared to the maintenance of peace, and the protection of human rights for all people, whether those rights be exercised alone or in association with others, without distinction as to race, sex, language or religious belief. Through an examination of the norms of Islamic and public international law on armed conflict, this thesis argues that Islamic law, which governs the doctrine of jihad, is realistic and practical. Further, it made a great contribution to international humanitarian law more than a millennium before the codification of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and eight centuries before the appearance of Hugo Grotius treatise "De jure belli ac pacis libri tres" in 1625. / Furthermore, this comparative study reveals that the word jihad might be one of the most misunderstood terms in the history of Islamic legal discourse. This analysis also claims that the division of the world into dar al-Islam (territory of Islam) and dar al-harb (territory of war), which is not predicated on a state of mutual hostility, was dictated by particular events, and was not imposed by scripture. Moreover, this discussion provides that Islamic humanitarian law regulates conduct during a jihad on the basis of certain humane principles, compatible with those upon which modern international conventions are based. Finally, this thesis concludes that there is a unique relationship between jihad and the notion of just war, a matter which qualifies it as the bellum justum of Islam.

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.

Thesis (LL. M.)--Judge Advocate General's School, U.S. Army, 1968. / "April 1968." Typescript. Includes bibliographical references. Also issued in microfiche.

No description available.

A thesis submitted in fulfilment to the degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Faculty of Commerce, Law and Management,School of Law, University of the Witwatersrand / It has been almost 10 years since the International Criminal Court (‘ICC’) issued two warrants for the arrest of former President of Sudan, Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir (‘Al Bashir’) on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. Despite the warrants, Al Bashir and some of his alleged co-perpetrators remain free as the ICC does not try suspects in absentia. Al Bashir has travelled to several countries, both contracting and non-contracting parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC (‘Statute’), in defiance of the warrants for his arrest without being arrested. Failure by states to cooperate with ICC requests to arrest and surrender him for prosecution has been the biggest challenge of the international criminal justice system over the years.Arresting and surrendering a person in the position of Al Bashir raises a number of legal issues relevant to this thesis. First, Sudan is a non-contracting state to the Statute and generally, it is not obliged to cooperate with the ICC. This raises the second question as to whether Al Bashir is entitled to immunities when it comes to contracting states to the Statute that are requested to arrest and surrender him to the ICC. Third, several contracting parties to the Statute have failed to arrest and surrender him to the ICC thereby breaching their obligations under the Statute. These states claim that there is a conflict between Articles 27(2), on non-immunity of a head of state, and 98(1), which requires the requested non-contracting state party to waive its immunity prior to arresting and surrendering Al Bashir to the ICC, in case they breach their customary international law obligations owed to Sudan. Fourth, they claim that the United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) Resolution 1593 (2005) which referred the situation of Sudan to the ICC does not impose any obligation on states other than Sudan to cooperate with the ICC on this matter. Fifth, several states have still failed to cooperate with ICC requests to arrest and surrender Al Bashir despite the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) holding that there is no conflict between their statute and international law obligations towards the Sudan. The PTC referred these non-cooperating states to the ICC Assembly of States Parties (‘ASP’) and United Nations Security Council (‘UNSC’) in terms of article 87(7) of the Statute. However, they have so far faced no consequences. What is unclear from Article 87(7) is the nature and scope of remedies that are available to the ASP and the UNSC when a non-cooperating state has been referred by the ICC for enforcement. It is also unclear as to what procedure the ASP and the UNSC would follow in enforcing cooperation. It is observed from the provisions of the Statute that the ASP’s powers are unclear, whereas the UNSC is expected to act in terms of its Chapter VII powers under the UN Charter. It is further observed from the decisions of the PTC and the reports of the ICC Prosecutor to the UNSC that both the ASP and the UNSC have not yet taken any action against noncooperating states. As a matter of fact, it is unclear whether the ASP or the UNSC will ever take any action against non-cooperating states for failing to arrest and surrender Al Bashir to the ICC. Using the example of Sudan and Al Bashir, this thesis analyses the enforcement of the ICC’s requests and decisions by the UNSC and the ASP in relation to states’ failure to cooperate. Since the ICC cannot operate without the cooperation of states, the thesis argues that there is a need for the ASP and UNSC to take strong measures against non-cooperating states. The thesis identifies a critical need for a strong, clear and elaborate follow-up mechanism against non-cooperating states that have been referred to the ASP and UNSC under the Statute in order to contribute to the fight against international crimes and ending impunity. The thesis therefore does two things. Firstly, it examines the nature and scope of the powers of the UNSC and ASP under the Statute in relation to enforcing state cooperation with the ICC requests. This entails exploring how the UNSC and ASP can compel states to fulfill their Statute obligation to cooperate with the ICC’s requests to arrest and surrender suspects. Secondly, the thesis develops recommendations to the UNSC and ASP for the enforcement of the ICC’s requests and decisions to arrest and surrender suspects. In order to develop proposals for an effective enforcement of cooperation with ICC requests to arrest and surrender Al Bashir and persons in similar position under the Statute, the thesis draws lessons from the two regional human rights tribunals of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IActHR) and the European Court on Human Rights (ECtHR). Although, the African Court on Human and People’s Rights (AfCHPR) has the capacity to monitor state cooperation with its decisions through the existence of a legal framework under the Charter, it has not yet developed this area of the law. The AfCHPR has neither clear practice nor policy on enforcement of state cooperation. The AfCHPR does not also have follow-up mechanisms on enforcement of state cooperation with its decisions. It is for this reason that a discussion of this system in this thesis is merely illustrative of the legal framework on state cooperation including the areas that may require improvement if the system is to achieve maximum state cooperation. / NG (2020)

LL.M. (International Law) / Africa’s Great Lakes Region (GLR) has in recent years experienced political strife, armed conflict and population displacements with severe humanitarian consequences, specifically the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Some authors regard the prevailing war in the DRC as the African equivalent of the First World War. This is because up to eight African countries and more than 10 rebel groups were involved in this war which plays itself out on Congolese territory. This war has been the deadliest since World War II, with a death toll of 5.4 million people, mostly as a result of disease and starvation. What is more, 1.8 million women have reportedly been raped in the eastern Congo. All these facts point to the limited or non – application of IHL by all the belligerents involved in the armed conflict in the DRC. Ever since, the UN Security Council has adopted more than 15 resolutions aimed at terminating the war in the DRC; however, the war is still ongoing in this country. Thus, this study advocates for the creation and implementation of a regional legal instrument whose purpose is to ensure respect for and application of IHL by all belligerents. Put differently, this study raises the question of the creation and implementation of a special court for the DRC based on the models of the special court for Sierra Leone, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).

Landmines have inflicted an insurmountable amount of physical and psychological harm, inhibiting social and economic development far after the conflict has ended. In an effort to create a world free of the weapon, a campaign to ban landmines was launched by non-governmental organizations. The Mine Ban Convention entered into force in 1999, requiring nation-states to immediately ban the use, production and transfer of anti-personnel landmines (APLs), destroy stockpiles within four years and remove landmines already planted within ten years. This study examines the level of legal compliance with the Mine Ban Convention. An empirical analysis is conducted using a data base constructed from reports published by the Landmine Monitor. This study finds that the treaty is a successful work in progress with a majority of Parties in compliance; 44 million stockpiled APLs have been destroyed and eleven states have completed mine clearance. 170 million stockpiled APLs and countless emplaced mines remain, indicating the world is still far from the goal of a mine-free world. / by Jacqueline C. Perez. / Thesis (M.A.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2010. / Includes bibliography. / Electronic reproduction. Boca Raton, Fla., 2010. Mode of access: World Wide Web.