DOCSLIB.ORG

Detailed Table of Contents (PDF Download)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Detailed Table of Contents (PDF Download) Contents Preface xxiii Abbreviations and Acronyms xxvii Acknowledgments xxxiii Foreword xxxvii part I Why 1 chapter 1 Foundations 3 A. Purposes 5 1. Protection of Civilians and Others Hors de Combat 7 Constitutional Review of Additional Protocol II 8 2. Minimize Unnecessary Suff ering 9 3. Mission Fulfi llment 10 B. Key Sources of LOAC 11 1. Treaties 11 2. Customary International Law 13 David J. Bederman, International Law Frameworks 13 C. Jus ad Bellum vs. Jus in Bello 16 1. Jus ad Bellum 16 2. Jus ad Bellum in an Age of Counterterrorism 21 3. Separation of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello 23 Prosecutor v. Fofana and Kondewa 25 Questions for Discussion 27 xi xii Contents D. Intersection with and Distinction from Human Rights Law 30 Th eodor Meron, Th e Humanization of Humanitarian Law 30 Legality of the Th reat or Use of Nuclear Weapons 32 Fourth Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights Concerning the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 34 Questions for Discussion 37 chapter 2 Basic Principles 39 Jean Pictet, Development and Principles of International Humanitarian Law 39 A. Military Necessity 40 Th e United States of America v. Wilhelm List et al. (Th e Hostages Trial) 42 Questions for Discussion 44 B. Humanity 45 Questions for Discussion 47 C. Distinction 48 Legality of the Th reat or Use of Nuclear Weapons 50 Constitutional Review of Additional Protocol II 52 Questions for Discussion 53 D. Proportionality 56 Questions for Discussion 59 chapter 3 Historical Development of LOAC 61 A. Antiquity Th rough the Code of Chivalry 63 1. In the Beginning 63 2. Th e Middle Ages 65 3. Early Modern Times 67 B. Lieber Code and Solferino 68 William Howard Russell, Dispatch to the Times 69 C. From the Hague to World War II 73 D. Th e Geneva Conventions, the Additional Protocols, and Other Post-World War II Developments 78 Commentary to the Fourth Geneva Convention 80 Contents xiii part II What and When 85 chapter 4 What Is Armed Conflict? 87 A. Geneva Conventions Framework 87 Questions for Discussion 91 B. Defi ning Armed Confl ict 91 1. Abandoning Old Concepts of War 92 Th e Prize Cases 92 U.S. v. Plenty Horses 94 Questions for Discussion 96 2. Modern Defi nition of Armed Confl ict 97 Prosecutor v. Tadić 97 a. International Armed Confl ict 100 U.S. v. Noriega 101 U.S. v. Prosperi 102 Questions for Discussion 107 b. Non-International Armed Confl ict 108 i. Common Article 3 108 Abella v. Argentina (La Tablada) 110 Prosecutor v. Tadić 114 Questions for Discussion 116 Prosecutor v. Fatmir Limaj 117 ii. Additional Protocol II 123 Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu 124 Ministre public and Centre pour l’égalité des chances et la lutte contre le racism v. C . et B . 125 Questions for Discussion 127 C. Counterterrorism as Armed Confl ict? 131 1. Determining the Applicable Law 132 Response of the Government of the United States of America to the letter from Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions 132 Questions for Discussion 134 2. Identifying Confl ict: When, Where, and for How Long? 136 Questions for Discussion 140 D. Cyber Operations as Armed Confl ict? 141 Questions for Discussion 144 xiv Contents chapter 5 Classifying Conflicts 147 A. Distinguishing and Transitioning Between Internal and International Armed Confl ict 147 1. Foreign State Involvement in a Non-International Armed Confl ict 152 Prosecutor v. Tadić 153 Questions for Discussion 157 2. Extraterritorial Force Against Non-State Armed Groups 159 Questions for Discussion 162 3. Complex Confl icts 163 Prosecutor v. Th omas Lubanga Dyilo 164 Questions for Discussion 169 4. Special Agreements 170 Prosecutor v. Tadić 171 Erin D. Mooney, Presence, Ergo Protection? UNPROFOR, UNHCR and the ICRC in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina 172 Questions for Discussion 173 B. Classifying Global Confl ict with Terrorist Groups 174 Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and William J. Haynes II, General Counsel of the Department of Defense 174 Memorandum from William H. Taft , State Department Legal Advisor 176 Hamdan v. Rumsfeld 177 Questions for Discussion 180 chapter 6 The Law of Belligerent Occupation 185 A. Determining the Existence of an Occupation 188 Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo 188 Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Confl ict in Georgia 193 Questions for Discussion 196 Al-Bassiouni v. Prime Minister of Israel 198 Disengaged Occupiers: Th e Legal Status of Gaza 200 Questions for Discussion 201 B. Th e Rights and Duties of the Occupying Power 202 1. Protection of Civilians 203 Situation of Human Rights in the Temporarily Occupied Autonomous Republic of Crimea and City of Sevastopol (Ukraine) 204 Contents xv Prosecutor v. Naletilić and Martinović 208 Questions for Discussion 210 2. Property Interests and Protections 211 Central Front—Ethiopia’s Claim 2, Partial Award 212 Questions for Discussion 213 3. Use of Force and Maintaining Public Order and Security 214 Ajuri v. IDF Commander in the West Bank 218 Questions for Discussion 224 C. Termination of Occupation 226 Questions for Discussion 229 part III Who 231 chapter 7 Combatants 233 A. Defi nition and Classifi cation 233 1. Combatant Status and the Four-Part Test 234 2. Classifi cations in Practice 237 Questions for Discussion 240 a. Members of Regular Armed Forces 240 Ex parte Quirin 240 Questions for Discussion 244 b. Militia and Irregular Fighters 246 Th e United States of America v. Wilhelm List et al. (Th e Hostages Trial) 247 United States v. Otto Ohlendorf et al. (Einsatzgruppen Case) 248 Military Prosecutor v. Omar Mahmud Kassem and Others 250 Questions for Discussion 253 George S. Prugh, Vietnam Studies: Law at War: Vietnam 1964-1973 253 Questions for Discussion 257 c. Article 44 of Additional Protocol I 259 Questions for Discussion 263 d. Medical and Religious Personnel 264 Questions for Discussion 266 B. Combatant Privileges and Protections 266 1. Combatant Immunity 266 xvi Contents U.S. v. John Walker Lindh 267 Questions for Discussion 271 2. Protection for Wounded and Hors de Combat 272 Will Payne and Andrew Dagnell, Incredible Story of the Falklands War Hospital that Treated Victims from Both Side Of Confl ict 273 Questions for Discussion 274 3. Respect for the Dead 276 Questions for Discussion 277 C. Detention in International Armed Confl ict: Prisoners of War 279 1. Treatment and Protection of POWs 280 Prisoners of War — Eritrea’s Claim 17 281 Questions for Discussion 287 2. Denial of Quarter 290 Trial of Major Henry Wirz 292 Questions for Discussion 295 3. Protecting Powers and Monitoring Mechanisms 296 Th e Neutral Intermediary Role of the ICRC: At the Heart of Humanitarian Action 298 4. Trial and Punishment of POWs 299 Questions for Discussion 301 5. Repatriation 302 Questions for Discussion 304 chapter 8 Civilians 305 Commentary to the Fourth Geneva Convention 306 A. Treaty Basics: Defi nitions and Framework for Protection 308 1. Defi nition of Civilian 311 2. Protected Persons 314 a. “In the Hands of” 315 Prosecutor v. Rajić 315 b. Nationality 317 Prosecutor v. Tadić 317 Prosecutor v. Delalić 319 Questions for Discussion 322 B. Are Th ey Civilians? 323 1. Peacekeepers 323 Prosecutor v. Sesay, Kallon and Gbao (RUF Case) 323 Questions for Discussion 325 2. Contractors 326 Contents xvii Th e Montreux Document: On Pertinent International Legal Obligations and Good Practices for States Related to Operations of Private Military and Security Companies During Armed Confl ict 328 Questions for Discussion 328 3. Police 331 Th e Operation in Gaza: Factual and Legal Aspects 331 Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the U.N. Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Confl ict (Goldstone Report) 333 Questions for Discussion 337 C. Civilians and the Conduct of Hostilities 338 1. Prohibition Against Attacks on Civilians 338 United States v. William L. Calley, Jr 339 Prosecutor v. Galić 343 Prosecutor v. Kupreškić 348 Questions for Discussion 350 2. Obligations to Protect Civilians 351 Adalah—Th e Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel v. Th e Minister of Defense 352 Questions for Discussion 357 Th e Goat Herders 358 Questions for Discussion 360 3. Direct Participation in Hostilities 361 Abella v. Argentina (La Tablada) 363 Public Committee Against Torture in Israel v. Gov’t of Israel 363 Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law 368 Questions for Discussion 378 D. Detention of Civilians 385 Case of Hassan v. United Kingdom 388 Prosecutor v. Delalić 391 Questions for Discussion 395 E. Humanitarian Assistance 395 Questions for Discussion 397 chapter 9 Battlefield Status and Detention in Non-International Armed Conflict 399 A. Distinction in NIAC — Identifying Parties to the Confl ict 400 1. Government Forces 401 2. Opposition Forces 403 a. Dissident Armed Forces 404 xviii Contents b. Organized Armed Groups 404 Gherebi v. Obama 405 Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law 408 Department of Defense Law of War Manual 411 Questions for Discussion 412 c. Enemy Combatants, Unprivileged Belligerents, or . ? 414 Al-Marri v. Pucciarelli 418 Anonymous v. State of Israel 427 Questions for Discussion 430 B. Detention Authority in NIAC 434 Hamdi v. Rumsfeld 435 Serdar Mohammed v. Ministry of Defence 437 Questions for Discussion 443 C. Procedures and Standards for Detention in NIAC 444 Jelena Pejic, Procedural Principles and Safeguards for Internment/Administrative Detention in Armed Confl ict and Other Situations of Violence 447 Questions for Discussion 449 part IV How 453 chapter 10 Identifying Targets: Legitimate Targets and Protected Objects 455 Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Confl ict in Georgia 458 A.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • THE ARMY LAWYER Headquarters, Department of the Army
    THE ARMY LAWYER Headquarters, Department of the Army Department of the Army Pamphlet 27-50-366 November 2003 Articles Military Commissions: Trying American Justice Kevin J. Barry, Captain (Ret.), U.S. Coast Guard Why Military Commissions Are the Proper Forum and Why Terrorists Will Have “Full and Fair” Trials: A Rebuttal to Military Commissions: Trying American Justice Colonel Frederic L. Borch, III Editorial Comment: A Response to Why Military Commissions Are the Proper Forum and Why Terrorists Will Have “Full and Fair” Trials Kevin J. Barry, Captain (Ret.), U.S. Coast Guard Afghanistan, Quirin, and Uchiyama: Does the Sauce Suit the Gander Evan J. Wallach Note from the Field Legal Cultures Clash in Iraq Lieutenant Colonel Craig T. Trebilcock The Art of Trial Advocacy Preparing the Mind, Body, and Voice Lieutenant Colonel David H. Robertson, The Judge Advocate General’s Legal Center & School, U.S. Army CLE News Current Materials of Interest Editor’s Note An article in our April/May 2003 Criminal Law Symposium issue, Moving Toward the Apex: New Developments in Military Jurisdiction, discussed the recent ACCA and CAAF opinions in United States v. Sergeant Keith Brevard. These opinions deferred to findings the trial court made by a preponderance of the evidence to resolve a motion to dismiss, specifically that the accused obtained and presented forged documents to procure a fraudulent discharge. Since the publication of these opinions, the court-matial reached the ultimate issue of the guilt of the accused on remand. The court-martial acquitted the accused of fraudulent separation and dismissed the other charges for lack of jurisdiction.
    [Show full text]
  • Justice in the Justice Trial at Nuremberg Stephen J
    University of Baltimore Law Review Volume 46 | Issue 3 Article 4 5-2017 A Court Pure and Unsullied: Justice in the Justice Trial at Nuremberg Stephen J. Sfekas Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr Part of the Fourteenth Amendment Commons, International Law Commons, and the Legal History Commons Recommended Citation Sfekas, Stephen J. (2017) "A Court Pure and Unsullied: Justice in the Justice Trial at Nuremberg," University of Baltimore Law Review: Vol. 46 : Iss. 3 , Article 4. Available at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ublr/vol46/iss3/4 This Peer Reviewed Articles is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Baltimore Law Review by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A COURT PURE AND UNSULLIED: JUSTICE IN THE JUSTICE TRIAL AT NUREMBERG* Hon. Stephen J. Sfekas** Therefore, O Citizens, I bid ye bow In awe to this command, Let no man live Uncurbed by law nor curbed by tyranny . Thus I ordain it now, a [] court Pure and unsullied . .1 I. INTRODUCTION In the immediate aftermath of World War II, the common understanding was that the Nazi regime had been maintained by a combination of instruments of terror, such as the Gestapo, the SS, and concentration camps, combined with a sophisticated propaganda campaign.2 Modern historiography, however, has revealed the
    [Show full text]
  • High Command Case: a Study in Staff and Command Responsibility
    JOHN JAY DOUGLASS* Colonel, JAGC High Command Case: A Study in Staff and Command Responsibility Less than twenty-five years after the conclusion of the major World War I1war crimes trials, international jurists, historians and the general public are not clear as to, nor are they apparently concerned with, the authority, procedure or even the significant legal decisions of the war crimes trials held both in Europe and the Far East following World War 11.1 Even a mere twenty-five years of experience indicates there will be other trials of those accused of criminal acts in war. Such trials, as well as international lawmakers, should well review the German High Command Trial before the United States Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in October 1948. The lessons of this trial may well be the most important of those from any of the trials held following World War 11. The thrust of this trial and its results relate to the authority of command- ers of military forces for actions of their troops and their personal respon- sibility, as well as the responsibility of staff officers in senior staff positions, for'actions taken by them or carried on under their direction. As a result of recent developments within the United States, arising from the war in Vietnam, it is worthwhile to review the German High Command Trial and to analyze its relationship to the present state of the law. The legal question of criminal responsibility of military commanders and staff officers who do *Commandant (Dean), The Judge Advocate General's School, U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex Ii Index of Cases Reported Or Cited in These Volumes
    J» ■ i, J L-, UJ> O'- ' / C , " i ANNEX II INDEX OF CASES REPORTED OR CITED IN THESE VOLUMES (References given in italics arc to reports. References not in italics are to citations. The figures in roman and in arabic figures refer to volumes and pages respectively.) Abbaye Ardcnnc Trial (Trial of Brigadier Kurt~ 111 6 9 ; Meyer). ✓ IV 85, 89, 997-110 5 , ; *X1I 123: ✓ X V 62, ¿4, 106,109, 133 - Ahlbrecht ......................................................... X I 89-90 « Almelo Trial (Trial or Otto Sandrock and 3 others)✓ / 35-45,1 0 6 ; ✓ 11 127; w V 1 0 ; . XI 46,50; . X IV 15 ; * X V 47, 97, 108, 184 Allfuldisch, Hans, and 60 others (sec Mauthausen Concentration Camp case). Altstötter, Josef, and others (sec Justkc Trial) .. Ambcrgcr, Karl (sec Dreierwalde Case) - Armour Packing Company v. United States .. s W 54 - Awochi, Washio ..............................................^Xlll 122-4 ; X V 121 » Back, P e t e r ........................................................ ✓/// 60-1 x Bauer, August ..............................................«'IX 65 v Bauer, Carl, Ernst Schramcck and Herbert Falten*Vlll 15-21; v X V 82 v'Baus, Christian ..............................................s l X 68-71 Becker, Friedrich, and others (sec Flossenberg Concentration Camp Trial) t'Becker, Gustav, and 19 others ........................ JVU 67-73,15 ✓ Belsen Trial (Trial of Josef Kramer and 44 others)..11 1-152;✓ ✓ III 6 3 ,6 6 ,6 9 .7 0 ,7 2 ,7 4 ; ✓ IV 79,86 ; ✓ V 14, 15, 23 ; ✓ IX 66 ; ✓ X 68, 173 ; ✓ XI 9,10,11,71,83; ✓ X V 45, 59, 61, 65, 67, 83, 86, 87, 92, 93, 97, 121.
    [Show full text]
  • Some International Law Problems Related to Prosecutions Before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
    SOME INTERNATIONAL LAW PROBLEMS RELATED TO PROSECUTIONS BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA W.J. FENRICK* I. INTRODUCTION The presentation of prosecution cases before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (the Tribunal) will require argument on a wide range of international law issues. It will not be possible, and it would not be desirable, simply to dust off the Nuremberg and Tokyo Judgments, the United Nations War Crimes Commission series of Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, and the U.S. government's Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No.10 and presume that one has a readily available source of answers for all legal problems. An invaluable foundation for legal argument before the Tribunal is provided by Pictet's Commentaries on the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the International Committee of the Red Cross' (ICRC) Commentaries on the Additional Protocols of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the few cases decided since 1950, old case law, and various learned articles and treatises. They must be reviewed and analyzed. At the same time, however, just as the prosecutors in the post-1945 war crimes trials argued successfully that customary law had evolved after 1907 and 1929, so it is reasonable to presume that customary law has evolved since the Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Additional Protocols of 1977. It is essential to pay due heed to the principles of nullum crimen sine lege and nulla poena sine lege.1 One must, however, distinguish * Senior Legal Advisor, Office of the Prosecutor, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of Military Occupation', the Journal of Modern History, Vol
    University of Birmingham International law and the transformation of war, 1899-1949 Gumz, Jonathan DOI: 10.1086/698960 License: Other (please specify with Rights Statement) Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Citation for published version (Harvard): Gumz, J 2018, 'International law and the transformation of war, 1899-1949: the case of military occupation', The Journal of Modern History, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 621-660. https://doi.org/10.1086/698960 Link to publication on Research at Birmingham portal Publisher Rights Statement: © 2018 by The University of Chicago General rights Unless a licence is specified above, all rights (including copyright and moral rights) in this document are retained by the authors and/or the copyright holders. The express permission of the copyright holder must be obtained for any use of this material other than for purposes permitted by law. •Users may freely distribute the URL that is used to identify this publication. •Users may download and/or print one copy of the publication from the University of Birmingham research portal for the purpose of private study or non-commercial research. •User may use extracts from the document in line with the concept of ‘fair dealing’ under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (?) •Users may not further distribute the material nor use it for the purposes of commercial gain. Where a licence is displayed above, please note the terms and conditions of the licence govern your use of this document. When citing, please reference the published version. Take down policy While the University of Birmingham exercises care and attention in making items available there are rare occasions when an item has been uploaded in error or has been deemed to be commercially or otherwise sensitive.
    [Show full text]
  • LAW MANTRA THINK BEYOND OTHERS (I.S.S.N 2321- 6417 (Online) Ph: +918255090897 Website: Journal.Lawmantra.Co.In E-Mail: [email protected] [email protected]
    LAW MANTRA THINK BEYOND OTHERS (I.S.S.N 2321- 6417 (Online) Ph: +918255090897 Website: journal.lawmantra.co.in E-mail: [email protected] [email protected] SUPERIOR ORDERS AND DEFENCE OF MISTAKE INTRODUCTION CONFLICT IN THE IDEOLOGIES BEHIND DEFENCE OF SUPERIOR ORDERS There has for long been a conflict on whether the act of the soldier shall impose criminal liability or not. It is because there are two policies that arise on keenly studying the liability. Both the policies are beneficial to the community of mankind.1One policy complies to the discipline in military forces and the other with the adherence to Law of war which lays down principles of peace. The underlying theme of both the policies is that in one case, it is expected that the sub- ordinate voluntarily not obey an order, and the other requires obeyance.2The two extreme, opposite theories are described3 as follows: DOCTRINE OF RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR The doctrine signifies the lack of responsibility on sub-ordinate’s part since, the act that he had committed was in pursuance of the order by his superior. This view is deemed fit in the case of Armed Forces.4 Since, the Armed Forces require discipline, that is the superiors be obeyed .Such a principle is used to conduct the men to battle, and lead them to victory, even at the risk of their lives. Human psychology works on selfish motives and self-preservation.5 However, as a part of military discipline, soldiers have to keep aside their selfish motives, accomplish the military objective, emerge victorious, preserve life of other soldiers and protect the national security.
    [Show full text]
  • «Apaug Qp Zmns. Page»
    Deconbor 11 tis 1947* ÜNIIH) KATIONS WAR CRIHBS OCMfcgSSICN. (Research Offioo) W A R CRIMES NEWS DIGEST. (1er internal circulation to tho Cocaai&gion) CONTENTS «apaug qp zm ns. page» Australia................ ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• 1* Europe. ... *............................................... 1« PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/c66e82/ SUMMARY OP EVENTS. A U S T R A L I. A. Arrost of Joh Booker. The Tines reported from Sydney, 26*11.47, that Dtr. Joh BECKER, former head of the Nasi Forty in Australia# was arrested on board an American tanker about to soil for the panama. Canal. A U S T R I A. Completion of U .S. T7ar .Crimes Trials« An A«P message from Vienna, 15.11.47, said that the U.S. Artsy headquarters had announced the ooinpletian of its war crimes trials in Austria. BELGIUM. Execution of Rexjsts. The Daily Telegraph reported, 11.11.47, that twenty«*seven Roxists (Belgian phscists), sentenced to death by a military court far crimea during the war, .wore shot at Charleroi. CZECHOSLOVAKIA. Trial of Ludin and Hofflo. Agenqy messages from Prague, 4 .1 2 .4 7 , stated that Bins EIARD LUDIN, mr-time German Minister to Slovakia, and General HDEETE, who commanded the S .S . there, were sontencod to be hanged far war crimes by the Slovak National Court. Release of War Criminals. Seo undert BRITISH ZONE, pago 5. GERMANY.... PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/c66e82/ - 2 - GERMANY. TRLlLS BY GERMAN COUROS. Lanionoy tcaards Nazis» 1 •• The Manchester Guardian, 22*11 «4.7, quotas a ata tea® nt published by the Lsgvl Division of the British Control Cocmissian criticising the leniency of sentences passed by Gernan courts an meribers of the criminal organisations* Of the defendants tried 2^6 belonged to the Gestapo and political 3S» <Xit of 2,000 sentences only 10 have involved inpriscn- xaant for over 3 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Reports of Trial of War Criminals, Volume IX, English Edition
    LAW REPORTS OF TRIALS OF . WAR CRIMINALS Selected and prepared by THE UNITED NATIONS WAR CRIMES COMMISSION VOLUME IX LONDON .' PUBLISHED FOR THE UNITED NATIONS WAR CRIMES COMMISSION BY HIS MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE 1949 PRICE 5s. Od. NET LAW REPORTS OF TRIALS OF WAR CRIMIN ALS SELECTED AND PREPARED BY THE UNITED NATIONS WAR CRIMES COMMISSION One of the aims of this series of Reports is to relate in summary form the course of the most important of the proceedings taken against persons accused ofcommitting war crimes during the Second World War, apart from the major war criminals tried by the Nuremberg and Tokyo International Military Tribunals, but . including those tried by United States Military Tribunals at Nuremberg. O{ necessity, the trials reported in these volumes are examples only, since the trials conducted before the various Allied Courts number well over a thousand. The trials selected for reporting, however, are those which are thought to be of the greatest)nterest legally and in which important points of municipal and international law arose and were settled. Each report, however, contains not only the outline of the proceedings in the trial under review, -but also, in a separate section headed" Notes on the Case ", such comments of an explanatory nature on the legal matters -arising in that trial as it has been thought useful to include. These notes provide also, at suitable points, general summaries and analyses of the decisions of the courts on specific points of law derived primarily from a study of relevant trials already reported upon in the series.
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations
    UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No. IT-95-14/2-T Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Date: 26 February 2001 International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 Original: ENGLISH IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge Richard May, Presiding Judge Mohamed Bennouna Judge Patrick Robinson Registrar: Mr. Hans Holthuis Date: 26 February 2001 PROSECUTOR v. DARIO KORDI] & MARIO ^ERKEZ JUDGEMENT The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Geoffrey Nice, Q.C. Mr. Patrick Lopez-Terres Mr. Kenneth R. Scott Ms. Susan Somers Mr. Fabricio Guariglia Counsel for the Accused: Mr. Mitko Naumovski, Mr. Turner T. Smith, Jr., Mr. Stephen M. Sayers, Mr. Robert Stein and Mr. Christopher G. Browning, Jr., for Dario Kordi} Mr. Božidar Kova~i} and Mr. Goran Mikuli~i}, for Mario ^erkez Case No. IT-95-14/2-T 26 February 2001 CONTENTS PART ONE: INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1 PART TWO: THE LAW .................................................................................................................9 I. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPLICATION OF ARTICLES 2, 3 AND 5 OF THE STATUTE....................................................................................................................9 A. ELEMENTS COMMON TO ARTICLES 2, 3 AND 5 OF THE STATUTE .................................................9 1. Requirement of an Armed Conflict..........................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • The Trial Chamber Found Krstić
    UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No. IT-98-33-T Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Date: 02 August 2001 International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Former Yugoslavia since 1991 Original: English IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge Almiro Rodrigues, Presiding Judge Fouad Riad Judge Patricia Wald Registrar: Mr. Hans Holthuis PROSECUTOR v. RADISLAV KRSTIC JUDGEMENT The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Mark Harmon Mr. Peter McCloskey Mr. Andrew Cayley Ms. Magda Karagiannakis Counsel for the Accused: Mr. Nenad Petrušic Mr. Tomislav Višnji} Case No.: IT-98-33-T 2 August 2001 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................1 II. FINDINGS OF FACT..................................................................................................................3 A. THE TAKE-OVER OF SREBRENICA AND ITS AFTERMATH..............................................................3 1. 1991-92: The Break-Up of the Former Yugoslavia................................................................3 2. 1992-1993: Conflict in Srebrenica..........................................................................................4 3. April 1993: The Security Council Declares Srebrenica a “Safe Area”...................................6 4. Early 1995: The Situation in the Srebrenica “Safe Area” Deteriorates ..................................9 5. Spring 1995: The Bosnian Serbs Plan To Attack the Srebrenica “Safe Area”.....................10
    [Show full text]
  • William Bradford, Barbarians at the Gates
    BARBARIANS AT THE GATES: A POST-SEPTEMBER 11TH..., 73 Miss. L.J. 639 73 Miss. L.J. 639 Mississippi Law Journal Winter 2004 Article BARBARIANS AT THE GATES: A POST-SEPTEMBER 11TH PROPOSAL TO RATIONALIZE THE LAWS OF WAR William Bradforda1 Copyright (c) 2004 Mississippi Law Journal, Inc.; William Bradford “And were a civilized nation engaged with barbarians, who observed no rules of war, the former must also suspend their observance of them, where they no longer serve to any purpose; and must render every action or recounter as bloody and pernicious as possible to the first aggressors.”1 I. Introduction A. Humanizing War with Law: Aspiration Since the dawn of man,2 war3 has been justified as an *640 object of divine ordination,4 the natural state of humanity5 and a tool in the progressive betterment of character,6 culture7 and civilization.8 In this hyper- ideological age tragically *641 symbolized by September 11, 2001, war, to the dismay of those who hoped material transformations might weaken its siren’s call,9 waxes ever more destructive,10 driving efforts to abolish force as a moral imperative11 and, less quixotically, to induce compliance with an accreting body of rules, known as international humanitarian law (IHL),12 to “humanize” armed conflict. *643 13 This progressive regulation14 has met nearly universal approbation:15 many ethical people, instinctively antipathetic *644 to war,16 welcome any anodyne and few proclaim its absolute independence from legal regulation.17 Indeed, the distinction between “murder” and “ killing in war” is now difficult to sustain without reference to positive law,18 and the term “war crime”19 has entered the popular lexicon20 accompanied by images of atrocity that provoke moral outrage.21 Empirically, states and individuals obey IHL at least some of the time,22 and the phrase “laws of war” is no longer ipso facto oxymoronic.
    [Show full text]