THE USE OF HUMAN SHIELDS AND THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY UNDER LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F16%3A33162480" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/16:33162480 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

THE USE OF HUMAN SHIELDS AND THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY UNDER LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Principle of proportionality is codifi ed in the Additional Protocol I as a flexible balancing test between collateral damages and military advantage and it outlaws military attacks when the collateral damages would be excessive to military advantage. However, asymmetrically weaker belligerents are using the principle of proportionality as a means to gain military advantage by shielding legitimate military targets by using human shields to restrict their adversaries' possibilities to conduct military operations. To deal with the abuse of obligations and use of human shields three approaches have arisen in academia and state practice. Firstly, under contractual model the human shields are disregarded completely. Secondly, under compromising model the human shields' value is deducted, allowing greater collateral damages in cases of human shields than usually. However, contribution argues that principle of proportionality does not allow any leeway for discretion when adversaries are trying to abuse the principle for military advantage by using human shields. Contractual model and compromising model both find their justifications in attempts to deny the advantages that human shields give to the adversaries and aim to make conflicts "fair" instead of protect civilians. Therefore the human rights model, where the fact that civilians are used for human shields has no legal relevance and they must be fully considered to the proportionality considerations, is logically the correct one for dealing with human shields.

Název v anglickém jazyce

THE USE OF HUMAN SHIELDS AND THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY UNDER LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT

Popis výsledku anglicky

Principle of proportionality is codifi ed in the Additional Protocol I as a flexible balancing test between collateral damages and military advantage and it outlaws military attacks when the collateral damages would be excessive to military advantage. However, asymmetrically weaker belligerents are using the principle of proportionality as a means to gain military advantage by shielding legitimate military targets by using human shields to restrict their adversaries' possibilities to conduct military operations. To deal with the abuse of obligations and use of human shields three approaches have arisen in academia and state practice. Firstly, under contractual model the human shields are disregarded completely. Secondly, under compromising model the human shields' value is deducted, allowing greater collateral damages in cases of human shields than usually. However, contribution argues that principle of proportionality does not allow any leeway for discretion when adversaries are trying to abuse the principle for military advantage by using human shields. Contractual model and compromising model both find their justifications in attempts to deny the advantages that human shields give to the adversaries and aim to make conflicts "fair" instead of protect civilians. Therefore the human rights model, where the fact that civilians are used for human shields has no legal relevance and they must be fully considered to the proportionality considerations, is logically the correct one for dealing with human shields.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

AG - Právní vědy

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Czech yearbook of public &amp; private international law

ISSN

1805-0565

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

2016

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

7

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

14

Strana od-do

243-256

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—