Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help
Authors help
Years help

Results found: 30

first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  international humanitarian law
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last
EN
Along the rapid development and proliferation of autonomous robotic weapons, machines begin to replace people on the battlefields. The use by the USA of Predators or Reapers and other unmanned aerial vehicles (so called drones) in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other places in the world clearly signals distancing of the soldiers from their targets. Some military and robotics experts have predicted that “killer robots” – fully autonomous weapons that could select and engage targets without human intervention – could be developed within 20 to 30 years. At present, military officials generally say that humans will retain some level of supervision over decisions to use lethal force, but their statements often leave open the possibility that robots could one day have the ability to make such choices on their own power. In this paper I will concentrate on the last kind of autonomous weapons, namely fully autonomous ones. It should however be noted that so far such a weapon does not yet exist. Nonetheless, lawyers should already be anticipating the effect of these technologies on international humanitarian law and the conduct of warfare. The thesis of the paper goes as follows: the use of autonomous weapons would be contrary to the basic and fundamental principles of international humanitarian law such as the principle of distinction, proportionality and military necessity and thus illegal. Such weapons are not capable of meeting the conditions enshrined in these principles. As such their use would threaten the well-being, life and health of civilians and civilian populations. On the other hand, there are scholars who are of the opinion that prohibiting the use of autonomous weapons would make no sense at all and that the development of such weapons is inevitable and will take place gradually. Moreover, autonomy in weapon systems might positively promote the aims of the laws of war in some technological configurations and operational circumstances – but not in others. As I will try to demonstrate below, the drawbacks of the use of autonomous weapons are of such magnitude that they exclude its legality. In my opinion, it is legal to use autonomous devices aimed at target identification but not autonomous weapons capable of attacking the target without human interference.
EN
Both the Nuremberg Tribunal in its judgment of Jan. 1, 1946 as well as the European Court of Human Rights’ Grand Chamber judgment of Oct. 21, 2013 in the case of Janowiec and Others v. Russia abstracted from a substantive decision on Russia’s responsibility for the Katyń massacre and failed to determine the consequences to be borne by the defending state, whose authorities decided upon the performance of the act in question. Contemporary Russian state denies that the murder of 22,000 Polish prisoners of war and inmates at the behest of the highest authorities of the USSR in 1940 was indeed a war crime. According to the position of the Russian government, represented before the ECHR, what took place was solely a crime committed by the administrative personnel who acted beyond their authority, the prosecution of which expired after 10 years, i.e. in 1950. The Russian side also claimed that it was not obliged to conduct an investigation on the matter and refused to disclose the content of the order to discontinue the criminal proceedings issued in 2004 to both the relatives of those who were murdered and to the ECHR. It also refused to recognize the murdered Polish prisoners of war as victims of political repression, claiming that it is unclear according to which criminal code they were sentenced to be shot. Russia’s position in denying the temporal jurisdiction of the ECHR and the ratione materiae with regard to the Katyń massacre which was in fact accepted by the ECHR in its judgment, should be subject to criticism. According to the statement of the court, Russia has not violated Article 2 of the Convention in its procedural aspect or Article 3 in its way of dealing with the relatives of the victims. The Court has lost the chance to contribute to appointing — in terms of human rights — a protection standard for a vital legal interest, which is currently the collective memory of the persecution of people because of their national, racial or religious background, ones who had become victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity, committed in the name of Nazi or communist ideology once pursued in Europe.
PL
Bezzałogowe statki powietrzne wykorzystywane są obecnie w praktycznie wszystkich konfliktach zbrojnych na świecie. Większość operacji z ich udziałem nakierowanych jest na zbieranie informacji wywiadowczych i rekonesans. W coraz większym stopniu wykorzystywane są również w misjach bojowych. Wraz z upowszechnieniem się maszyn bezzałogowych pojawił się problem legalności ich stosowania w świetle norm ius in bello. Jednym z zagadnień wzbudzających liczne kontrowersje jest status osób sterujących tego rodzaju samolotami. W pierwszej części opracowania krótko przedstawiona została najnowsza historia wykorzystania bezzałogowych statków powietrznych na polu walki. Następnie zaprezentowane zostały teoretyczne założenia związane z prawem konfliktów zbrojnych, w szczególności źródła prawa międzynarodowego oraz podstawowe definicje potrzebne do rozstrzygnięcia głównego problemu badawczego. W dalszej kolejności analizie poddane zostały możliwe scenariusze klasyfikacji operatorów statków bezzałogowych w świetle międzynarodowego prawa humanitarnego. Artykuł uzupełniono o wnioski końcowe i podkreślono możliwe rozwiązania
EN
Unmanned aerial vehicles are one of the most popular means of warfare in modern armed conflicts. Most of them are used in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance Jacek Chojnacki 147 missions, but for some time they have also been deployed into war zones in order to attack hostile troops. Consequently, a number of questions arise relating to their legality in terms of ius in bello. One of the most controversial aspects concerns the status of a drone operator in international humanitarian law. The article presents briefly the modern history of unmanned aerial vehicles. It also provides some theoretical background, especially the sources of international law of war, and some basic definitions of the different participants of modern conflicts. The main part presents some possible solutions to the research problem and highlights different approaches to some issues. This paper has been complemented with conclusions
EN
Review of a book: Noam Zamir, Classifcation of Conflicts in International Humanitarian Law: The Legal Impact of Foreign Intervention in Civil Wars, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham: 2017
EN
The paper is presenting the examination of the cyberwarfare phenomenon in its legal context. The cyberattacks are increasingly effective measures of modern combat and would probably become the most crucial dimension of forthcoming armed conflict. The role of the international humanitarian law is to determine whenever the cyberattack is reaching the threshold of an armed conflict. The aim of the article is to present the existing framework of ius in bello in terms of its temporal scope of applicability, especially in the light of the Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare. It supported conclusion that the international law requires an revision of the armed conflict definition to sufficiently addressed the challenges arising from growing cyber activity.
EN
The article carries out the two track analysis. The frst part discusses the complexity of the private military companies' regulation in the light of modern changes of the warfare and concerns raised on the possible violations of international humanitarian law and human rights. The second part describes the Swiss Initiative (with focus to the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers) established by the main stakeholders. The article aims to present to which extent the bottom-up initiatives may satisfy the legal standards of industry regulation.
EN
The paper deals with the legal definition of attack under international humanitarian law, analysed in the context of cyber “attacks”. The armed nature of cyber operation is distinguished from a violent one and therefore special section is devoted to the indirect consequences of cyber attacks. It is also noted that the incremental resort to automated weapon systems, controlled by computer networks still highly vulnerable to hostile malware and interference, challenges the current state of law. Finally, the author attempts to render the linkage between law and IT, both greatly concerned with cyber security.
EN
The article carries out the two track analysis. The frst part discusses the complexity of the private military companies' regulation in the light of modern changes of the warfare and concerns raised on the possible violations of international humanitarian law and human rights. The second part describes the Swiss Initiative (with focus to the Montreux Document and the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers) established by the main stakeholders. The article aims to present to which extent the bottom-up initiatives may satisfy the legal standards of industry regulation.
EN
The aim of the paper is to generally outline the relationship between the law of armed conflict and human rights protection, and thus the usability of the human rights standards in the military occupation. The paper provides an analysis of the application of relevant legislation and will aim to explore complementarity, compatibility and possible exceptions to the applicability of those standards. Finally, the paper aims to identify practical and legal loopholes in the implementation of the human rights commitments and options for addressing these international legal problems.
EN
The purpose of this work is to prove that the theory of constructivism can be an escape from the trap of the constant struggle for influence, which now includes interdisciplinary research combining international law and international relations. For this purpose, the work is divided into three sections. In the first one, the author briefly presents the genesis of in- terdisciplinary research on international law and international relations. In the second part, the sceptical approach of international law researchers towards combined interdisciplinary research is presented. Also in this section, the theory of constructivism is characterised as a potential area for mutual cooperation between international law and international rela¬tions. In the final part, based on the relationship between international humanitarian law and the features of modern weapons, the author tries to prove that the theory of constructiv- ism is perfectly suited to the analysis of contemporary relations between international law and the policies of nations on the international stage.
EN
Review of a book: Marco Sassòli, International Humanitarian Law: Rules, Controversies, and Solutions to Problems Arising in Warfare, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham: 2019
|
2022
|
vol. XLVIII
|
issue 3
323-335
EN
Civil defence, whose main objective is the protection of the civilian population, is a component of the concept of society’s resilience, but in the provisions of international humanitarian law (regulating the conduct of parties fighting in an armed conflict), it is limited to the protection of civil defence organisations (such as a fire brigade) performing strictly defined humanitarian tasks, requiring thorough preparation and securing of appropriate resources. The state-parties to the conflict shall respect and protect civil defence organisations and personnel and military units designated to serve as civil defence on a permanent basis. Also, in the case of belligerent occupation, the occupying state is obliged to enable the implementation of these tasks by civil defence organisations of the occupied territory; in addition, the cases where it is permissible to seize buildings and equipment belonging to these organisations have been seriously limited. Thus, well-organised, efficient, and effective civil defence formations are an important element of the state’s defence system, which serves the population in danger, and its efficient and effective functioning can contribute significantly to building and strengthening the resilience of society in the conditions of armed conflict and belligerent occupation.
EN
This article examines the phenomenon of internal displacement from the perspective of the existing legal framework and those measures which should guarantee protection for internally displaced populations worldwide. With this aim in mind, the article begins by assessing the role of international law and try to ascertain which legal norms are applicable to protect internally displaced persons. As a second step, it analyzes the question of responsibility for the protection of internally displaced persons, i.e. whether this lies with the state of origin through its national law, or rather with the international community, and examines the relevant provisions of international law. While concluding and identifying the existing gaps in the current legislation, the article demonstrates that internally displaced persons should become the objects of a specific system of law and legal protection. At the same time, the text intends to contribute to the contemporary debate promoting efforts to strengthen the protection of internally displaced persons and to disseminate knowledge about this vulnerable group of people.
PL
Międzynarodowe prawo humanitarne konfliktów zbrojnych stanowi obecnie ugruntowane ramy prawne dla ochrony ludności cywilnej i osób cywilnych w czasie konfliktów zbrojnych. Ochrona ludności cywilnej jest współcześnie jednym z najważniejszych i jednocześnie najtrudniejszych celów stawianych prawu humanitarnemu. Spośród wszystkich regulacji szczególne znaczenie posiadają Konwencje genewskie z 1949 r. i oba Protokoły dodatkowe z 1977 r. stanowiące swoisty rdzeń tej ochrony. Jasno określają one zasady postępowania sił zbrojnych stron konfliktu w stosunku do autochtonicznej ludności cywilnej, cudzoziemców, osób poddanych specjalnej lub szczególnej ochronie, zarówno w sytuacji bezpośrednich działań zbrojnych, jak i w trakcie okupacji wojennej. Wreszcie akty te dostarczają również możliwości wykorzystania alternatywnych sposobów ochrony osób i obiektów cywilnych, choćby w postaci ustanowienia stref zdemilitaryzowanych czy zasad pokojowej ewakuacji obszarów wysokiego ryzyka.
EN
International humanitarian law of armed conflicts is nowadays a well-established legal structure prepared to protect civilian population and civilians during armed conflicts. Protection of civilian population is currently one of the most important and, at the same time, most difficult purposes of humanitarian law. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocols of 1977 are the core of this protection and they are particularly significant instruments among other regulations. These instruments clearly describe the rules of the behaviour of armed forces of the sides of the conflict during armed operations and belligerent occupation towards local civilian population, foreigners and persons under special protection. Ultimately these laws also show alternative methods of protection which are helpful for saving civilians and civilian structures, for instance, the establishment of demilitarized zones, or rules of peaceful evacuation of high risk zones.
EN
Based on the work of S. Baron-Cohen, the text considers the relationship of empathy disorders with the perception of humanity in the context of the conduct of hostilities. Making use of philosophical and legal assumptions, it examines the understanding of the principles of humanity and dictates of public conscience, namely the Martens Clause, providing for the moral compass of international humanitarian law. Controversially it argues that the widely proclaimed postulate of warfare humanisation is a kind of paradox. On the one hand, we assume that man is inherently good and, therefore, the conduct of war should be more humane; on the other hand, we perform it by withdrawing man from the battlefield and by replacing him with autonomous systems . Will the replacement of human weaknesses kind by artificial intelligence lead to a revolutionary solution and reduction of suffering or will it only speed up movement of humanity on the slippery slope? In this text, the author will try to draw the reader's attention to the often overlooked ethical dilemmas and issues of fundamental nature which are often lacking in the security studies.
EN
In recent years, armed conflicts have changed in nature (civil war, ‘terrorism’) and the means used are increasingly technological (robotisation, cyberwar). Faced with these developments, some would claim International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is outdated. While these technological innovations present new challenges in the application of IHL, it still constitutes a relevant legal framework for armed conflicts and the conduct of hostilities. Indeed, the flexibility of IHL allows it to adapt to contemporary conflicts. Therefore, this shows that the statements about its obsolescence are primarily political in nature.
Prawo i Polityka
|
2015
|
issue 6
177-185
EN
The author presents and analyses the joint initiative of Switzerland and the International Committee of the Red Cross on strengthening the implementation of international humanitarian law. The proposals include regular Meetings of States on International Humanitarian Law, thematic discussions on international humanitarian law issues and national reports presented periodically.
EN
Cyberspaces can be significantly influenced by simple tools and tactics, and offer cost-effective solutions for states to achieve their objectives. However, it can also be used for conducting cyberwarfare, and its effects remain in gray areas. The spectrum of cyberwarfare activities ranges from minor web disruptions to crippling attacks on critical national infrastructures. Nevertheless, cyberattacks present a unique challenge in applying well-established humanitarian legal principles, particularly regarding the distinction between civilian and military targets. This is because of the interconnectedness and shared infrastructure of cyberspace between civilian and military entities, which blurs the lines between combatants and civilian populations. This article seeks to shift the general perception of the problems associated with this manner of conducting hostilities by building on the learning of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Furthermore, the authors examine the cyber activities that occurred during the conflict and the legal and ethical challenges that arise from classifying these activities and applying international law. They try to distinguish cyber activities as an act of force or armed attack, with a focus on determining the criteria that played a role in this classification, in light of Articles 2 (4) and 51 of the UN Charter. With reference to the United Nations (UN) Charter and the principles of self-defence, the concept of attack is scrutinised. Furthermore, the article addresses the principles of distinction and proportionality in relation to qualified cyber activities as an armed attack in the same conflict, emphasising the importance of the principle of proportionality in assessing cyber warfare.
EN
The subject of the article is the question of relevance of the present international humanitarian regulations to the changing ways of conducting military operations. Most of the regulations covering these issues were established soon after the World War II and are mostly obsolete. Armed conflicts have changed ever since – these days they are mostly carried out by terrorist or paramilitary organizations rather than states. Also, new methods of conducting military operations have emerged, such as targeted killing where new types of weaponry are used, such as drones. This gives rise to a reflection upon the legality of such measures.
PL
Artykuł jest próbą odpowiedzi na pytanie o stopień dostosowania obecnych regulacji prawnomiędzynarodowych do zmieniających się sposobów prowadzenia konfliktów zbrojnych. Większość przepisów regulujących te kwestie sformułowano w niedługim czasie po zakończeniu II wojny światowej i w dużej mierze nie odpowiadają one aktualnej rzeczywistości. Konflikty zbrojne zmieniły bowiem swój charakter – coraz rzadziej prowadzą je państwa, a coraz częściej grupy terrorystyczne czy organizacje paramilitarne. Pojawiają się również coraz nowsze sposoby prowadzenia działań zbrojnych, takie jak np. targeted killing, w których są wykorzystywane nowe rodzaje broni, np. drony. Potrzebna jest zatem krytyczna refleksja dotycząca legalności takich działań.
EN
“Operation Cast Lead” undertaken by the Israeli armed forces against Hamas forces in the Gaza strip in 2008/2009 raises a significant number of international legal issues. These issues relate to the nature of the military conflict, the legal status of the Gaza strip under international humanitarian law, but also, more generally, to the applicability and suitability of international humanitarian law in such kinds of asymmetric warfare taking place in densely populated areas. Besides, the article also questions at least some of the findings made by the “Goldstone Report” tasked by the United Nations Human Rights Council to investigate alleged violations of international humanitarian law during the armed conflict.
first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.