Thesis (M.A.). / Written for the Dept. of Anthropology. Title from title page of PDF (viewed 2008/03/12). Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.) -- University of Maryland, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references. Includes bibliographical references (p. 210-219). Also available via the World Wide Web.

"Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration from the Naval Postgraduate School, December 2008." / Advisor(s): Heath, Susan ; Kang, Keebom. "December 2008." "MBA professional report"--Cover. Description based on title screen as viewed on January 28, 2009. Includes bibliographical references (p. 51). Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2003. / Title from first page of PDF file. Document formatted into pages; contains xii, 420 p.; also includes graphics Includes bibliographical references (p. 411-420). Available online via OhioLINK's ETD Center

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 2006. / Title from title screen (site viewed on Nov. 22, 2006). PDF text: ii, 333 p. : ill. ; 1.82Mb. UMI publication number: AAT 3217536. Includes bibliographical references. Also available in microfilm and microfiche format.

This thesis is concerned with reparation for human rights and international humanitarian law breaches committed by or attributed to international organizations. These breaches constitute internationally wrongful acts which according to the International Law Commission's Draft articles on the responsibility of international organizations, give rise to an obligation on the offending organization to afford reparation. However, in practice, the obligation to afford reparation is unimplemented. The thesis explores why this is. The thesis considers how the law of responsibility intersects with the specialised regimes of human rights and international humanitarian law and particularly, their application to remedies and reparation owed to individuals. It reviews the various gaps in the normative framework and the limitations of existing redress mechanisms. The thesis analyses the cogency of the arguments and rationales that have been used by international organisations to limit institutional liability and the scope and functioning of redress mechanisms, included by the resort to lex specialis principles. It is postulated that the standards of reparation must be drawn from the nature of the breach and the resulting harms and not by who is responsible for the breach. In this respect the thesis is an exercise in the progressive development of the law. Having determined that existing redress mechanisms cannot afford adequate or effective remedies and reparation, the thesis explores how to move towards a model that achieves greater compliance. Indeed, should it be accepted that international organizations must afford remedies and reparation for breaches of human rights and IHL that correspond to the standards that exist in those specialised fields then it is argued that there is a corresponding obligation on them to put in place the modalities for that to be achieved.

No description available.

The context for this work is set by the proliferation of intrastate conflicts and the international legal debate of humanitarian intervention. The thesis specifically addresses the concept of the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) as formulated by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). The objective is to assess the present quality of R2P as a concept of international law. Five components of the R2P framework are discussed: the primary responsibility of every state to protect its population from large-scale killings and large-scale ethnic cleansing; the right of other states to collective humanitarian intervention through the United Nations; a right of unilateral humanitarian intervention without prior Security Council authorization; the responsibility of the international community to take military action; and the criteria for external military involvement. Methodologically, the analysis is grounded in the dominant theory of legal positivism and its doctrine of sources, which requires notably an analysis of treaties and customary international law. An ethical theory is devised and applied, however, to remedy inadequacies of a strictly positivist method that sets out to determine international law solely on the basis of hard facts. These ethical considerations serve as a background theory to provide guidance in difficult cases of treaty or customary law analysis, and they fill gaps in positive international law as legally binding “principles of ethical law”. In conclusion, the individual components of R2P differ in terms of their legal status and the degree to which it can be explained by the traditional posivist approach to international law. The primary responsibility of every state has become accepted as a hard norm of international customary law; the right of collective humanitarian intervention is provided for in Chapter VII of the UN Charter; a right of unilateral humanitarian intervention has become part of the international legal system as a “principle of ethical law”; the residual responsibility of the international community is a principle of “legal soft law”; finally, positive international law defines no criteria delineating the permissible and required use of force for the protection of foreign populations. / Law, Faculty of / Graduate

Magister Legum - LLM / In this minithesis, I demonstrate that International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law are two distinct but related fields of law. First, the examination deals with the instance that the aim of both branches of law, the protection of human rights, is common, but the approach to reach this aim is different. In this regard, I show numerous points of divergence of both branches of law which have their origin in the fundamentally different historical developments of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law. I give the main attention to the application of both sets of law, whereby the contractions and legal gaps of the protection of human rights become apparent. The proposals dealing with the solution of these issues are discussed. I argue that a new legal instrument for a comprehensive and compatible protection of human rights is necessary, especially in times of internal strife. Regarding the question as to whether International Humanitarian Law or International Human Rights Law should apply if both branches are applicable, I take the view to apply the roman principle of law lex specialis derogat legi generali in such a way that the more specific rule whenever they have a specific justification for dealing with specific problems is applicable. Both branches of law do not merge to one, but they converge to a harmonious relationship, where they complement each other and provide the highest protection of human rights. / South Africa

Please read the abstract in the section 00front of this document. / Thesis (LLD)--University of Pretoria, 2006. / Jurisprudence / LLD / Unrestricted