The main purpose of this work is to investigate if the US ́s killing of Osama bin Laden on 2 May 2011 in Abbottabad in Pakistan was lawful. The background to the killing is what happened on 11 September 2001 when four US airplanes were hijacked and crashed into World Trade Center and Pentagon. Al Qaeda, a terrorist organisation led by Osama bin Laden, was immediately suspected for the attacks, which led to the starting point of the US ́s ‘global war on terror’. This work tries to give a short brief on ‘global war on terror’ and answer if there is a global war on terror and/or if a new category of war is needed. In order to get an answer to the main question of this work I had to investigate if US is in an international armed conflict or in a non-international armed conflict with Al Qaida. Another important question to investigate is if an armed conflict in one State can spill over to another State and still be consider as an armed conflict. Other important questions to answer are, if Osama bin Laden was a legitimate target under international humanitarian law, if he was a civilian or if he had a continuous combat function and what level of participation in hostilities he had? Not less important is also to investigate if human rights law is applicable when Osama bin Laden was killed, especially the fundamental right to life. Lastly I end my investigation with a quick review of the laws of jus ad bellum in order to get an answer if US had a right to resort to force in Pakistan. My conclusion is that the US was not involved in an armed conflict with al Qaeda in Pakistan where the killing took place. The conflict between the US and al Qaeda in Afghanistan is to be categorised as a non-international conflict. This conflict cannot be described as a conflict that has spilled over to Abbottabad where Osama bin Laden was killed. All people, including Osama bin Laden, has a right to life. Because of lack of information on what happened in Abbottabad when Osama bin Laden was killed it is impossible to give a clear legal answer if the US had the right to kill him. It could be lawful, but it could also be considered as a crime against international human rights law.

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. / "Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures en vue de l'obtention du grade de Maîtrise en droit - option recherche(LL.M)"

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.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Universität, Frankfurt am Main, 2006. / Material type: Dissertations. Includes bibliographical references (p. 283-317).

No description available.

Plus de soixante ans après sa signature, qui sont les personnes bénéficiaires de la qualité de réfugié au sens de l’article 1A de la Convention de Genève relative au statut de réfugié de 1951? En effet, si cette convention compte parmi les plus ratifiées au monde et n’a jamais été remise en cause, celle-ci fait pourtant l’objet de polémiques croissantes portant sur sa capacité à protéger les personnes contraintes de s’exiler. Elle s’applique par ailleurs dans un contexte politique de suspicion grandissante à l’égard des demandeurs d’asile. On peut donc se demander qui sont aujourdh’ui les personnes qui se voient reconnaître la qualité de réfugié ? A cette fin, l’étude s’appuie sur une analyse comparée des jurisprudences de plusieurs pays occidentaux : Australie – Belgique - Canada - Etats-Unis - France – Grande-Bretagne – Nouvelle-Zélande. Elle s’appuie aussi sur une analyse systémique de l’article 1A et ses interprétations jurisprudentielles à la lumière des évolutions du droit international des droits de l’homme et du droit international humanitaire. Ainsi, l’analyse met en lumière plusieurs points. Plus que les motifs invoqués ou la nature des mauvais traitements craints, c’est sur le caractère individuel ou collectif des persécutions que se dessine une ligne de fracture entre les Etats occidentaux. En effet, ces derniers ont, de manière convergente, fait évoluer leur interprétation de la qualité de réfugié quand les requérants invoquent des persécutions individuelles. C’est ainsi que les individus craignant d’être persecutés en raison de l’expression de leurs opinions politiques ou religieuses dissidentes, ou du libre exercice de leurs droits fondamentaux, quel que soit leur genre ou leur orientation sexuelle, se voient aujourd’hui communément reconnaître la qualité de réfugié. Dans le cadre de ces persécutions individuelles, les Etats ont aussi développé de manière convergente une interprétation assouplie des agents de persécution, acceptant ainsi de protéger les personnes fuyant des mauvais traitements perpétrés par des agents étatiques et des personnes privées. En revanche, il existe encore de nombreuses divergences entre les Etats lorsque les individus revendiquent fuir des persécutions collectives. S’appuyant sur la reconnaissance d’une interprétation plus ou moins individualiste de la qualité de réfugié, les personnes craignant d’être persécutées en raison de leur race, de leur nationalité ou de leur appartenance à un groupe religieux ne doivent pas satisfaire aux mêmes exigences pour se voir reconnaître la qualité de réfugié. Et dans le contexte actuel où de plus en plus de personnes fuient des persécutions collectives perpétrées dans un Etat en situation de conflit armé, ces divergences sont d’autant plus importantes. / Sixty years after its signatory, who can be qualify as a refugee under the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugee ? If it is one of the most ratified treaty of the world, it’s relevance have nevertheless recently been questioned and some commentators don’t hesitate to speak of an outdated Convention. Moreover, it applies in a political context of clear suspicion against asylum-seekers. So, we can wonder who can nowadays qualify as a refugee among the million of persons fleeing their home ? To answer to this question, the study focuses on judicial review of many industrialized countries, such as Australia – Belgium – Canada – United States – France – Great-Britain and New Zealand. A systemic interpretation of Article 1A and its judicial interpretation in the light of both international human right law and international humanitarian law also helps to conduce the study. First, the analyse reveals that it is not on the motives of persecution neither the nature of the treatment feared that we can observe similarities or differences between the countries. It is on individual or collective persecutions. When asylum seekers look for international protection based on individual persecutions, States have commonly adopted a dynamic interpretation of article 1A . Persons who have a well-founded fear of being persecuted because they have freely express their dissent political or religious opinion, their sexual orientation, or because they refuse to conform to the roles and identities attributing to their gender, can be recognised as refugees in all the countries of the study. In the context of individual persecutions, States have also commonly developed an evolutive interpretation of the persecution agents. They protect all the persons who risk to be persecuted by state agents or non-state agents. On the contrary, there are many continuing and growing divergences between States when persons flee collective persecutions because of their race, their nationality of their belonging to a religious group. They keep on developing a different interpretation of the individualist definition of the refugee. And while more and more person ask for international protection because they flee collective persecutions during an armed conflict, these divergences are even more important.

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)

Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. / O trabalho expõe a consolidação do direito à verdade pelo Direito Internacional e a complementaridade entre as comissões da verdade e os tribunais, mecanismos de justiça de transição, como a combinação que melhor lhe confere aplicabilidade. Primeiramente, a tese reivindica que a transição e a consolidação democrática devem se dar por meio da prestação de contas com o passado, o que se torna possível na medida em que se promoveram a partir da 2a Guerra Mundial significativas alterações no Direito Internacional, que se afasta do paradigma vesfaliano de soberania. Aborda-se assim o excepcional desenvolvimento do Direito Internacional dos Direitos Humanos, do Direito Internacional Humanitário e do Direito Penal Internacional, centralizados na ideia de responsabilidade. A tese também abrange o desenvolvimento do direito à verdade no seio da Organização das Nações Unidas e dos sistemas regionais de proteção de direitos humanos, tendo alcançado o status de norma imperativa ou peremptória, sendo explorados os obstáculos ao seu exercício como no caso de anistias e outras medidas similiares como a prescrição, a justiça militar e a coisa julgada. Enfrentam-se, ainda, as potencialidades e limites da verdade que resulta de comissões da verdade e dos tribunais, concebida esta como conhecimento sobre os fatos e o reconhecimento da responsabilidade pelo ocorrido. O trabalho aborda temas como a independência e imparcialidade das comissões de verdade, seus poderes e o alcance de suas conclusões e recomendações. Por sua vez, com vistas a identificar as verdades a serem alcançadas pelos tribunais, privilegia-se o processo criminal, por se entender que a sentença penal pressupõe o exercício mais completo do devido processo. A imperatividade do direito à verdade é também demonstrada pela defesa da participação da vítima no processo criminal e da admissão de culpa por parte do acusado -- ambos consagrados pelo Tratado de Roma. Por fim, a tese analisa alguns cenários para a complementaridade entre estes dois mecanismos de justiça de transição, fazendo o estudo dos casos do Chile, Peru, Serra Leoa e Quênia, casos estes permeados pelo Direito Internacional, seja pela influência da jurisdição universal ou pelo impacto da jurisdição internacional. O caso brasileiro, por certo, não se ajusta a nenhum destes cenários. Sua caracterização como um diálogo em aberto, para efeitos deste trabalho, pressupõe que o Brasil encontra-se em um importante momento de decisão sobre a complementaridade entre comissões da verdade e tribunais - a recente aprovação da Comissão Nacional da Verdade deve conviver com o aparente conflito entre a decisão do Supremo Tribunal Federal, que afirmou a constitucionalidade da Lei de Anistia de 1979, e a decisão da Corte Interamericana no caso Araguaia, que entende nulos os dispositivos da lei que obstaculizam o processamento dos responsáveis, ambas no ano de 2010 - com a oportunidade de demonstrar que a passagem do tempo não arrefece as obrigações a que se comprometeu no cenário internacional. / The dissertation exposes the consolidation of the right to truth by international law and the complementarity of truth commissions and tribunals, both transitional justice mechanisms, as the combination that better confers its aplicability. First, the work claims that transition to and consolidation of democracy should provide accountability for past abuses, what became possible by the changes that have impacted international law after the World War II. The exceptional development of international human rights law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law is explored, considered the idea of responsability. The dissertation takes care of the development of the right to truth within the United Nations Organization and the human rights regional systems, and its status of imperative or peremptory norm, as well the obstacles for its exercise in the case of amnesties and other similar measures as statute of limitation, military justice and doble jeopardy (res judicata). The truth that results from truth commissions and tribunais its potentialities and limits are here conceived as knowledge e acknowledgment of what occured. The work also considers aspects as the independence and impartiality of truth commissions, its powers and the reach of its conclusions and recommendations. On the other hand, considering the truth to be obtained by tribunals, the dissertation priviledges the analysis of criminal procedure, in the sense that a criminal veridict implies due process. The imperativity of the right to truth is also demonstrated by the participation of victims in the criminal procedure and the admission of guilty by the accused both celebrated by the Statute of Rome. The dissertation also covers some sceneries of complementarity between truth commissions and tribunals, making use of the case of Chile, Peru, Sierra Leone and Kenya, cases that suffered significant impact by international law, considered the influence of universal jurisdiction or the impact of international jurisdiction. The Brazilian case, at the end, does not fit precisely in any of these sceneries. Its caracterization as an open dialogue assumes that the country has come face to face with the debate of complementarity the recent approval of the National Truth Commission has to live together with the apparent conflict between two decisions held in 2010: the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of the 1979 Amnesty Law and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the Araguaia Case that considered null and void the parts of the law that obstacle the criminal persecution of the ones responsible -, and has opportunity to demonstrate that time has not moderated the obligations to which Brasil has compromised with in the international arena.