Since the mid-19th century military powers and various writers have tried to define the notion of belligerent occupation and, in particular, the beginning thereof. There are many situations in which a state of occupation is controversial or even denied. When is control so effective that an invasion turns into a state of belligerent occupation? What is the minimum area of a territory that can be occupied; a town, a hamlet, a house or what about a hill taken by the armed forces? This paper examines what seems to be an important gap of the Fourth Geneva Convention: contrary to the Hague Regulations of 1907 it does not provide a definition of belligerent occupation. It is argued that the Fourth Geneva Convention follows its own rules of applicability and that therefore the provisions relative to occupied territories apply in accordance with the “functional beginning” of belligerent occupation approach from the moment that a protected person finds him or herself in the hands of the enemy. Henry Dunant Prize 2010 from the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights (ADH Geneva)

The customary law of belligerent occupation goes back to the Hague and Geneva Conventions. Recent instances of such occupation include Iraq, the former Yugoslavia, the Congo and Eritrea. But the paradigmatic illustration is the Israeli occupation, lasting for over 40 years. There is now case law of the International Court of Justice and other judicial bodies, both international and domestic. There are Security Council resolutions and a vast literature. Still, numerous controversial points remain. How is belligerent occupation defined? How is it started and when is it terminated? What is the interaction with human rights law? Who is protected under belligerent occupation, and what is the scope of the protection? Conversely, what measures can an occupying power lawfully resort to when encountering forcible resistance from inhabitants of the occupied territory? This book examines the legislative, judicial and executive rights of the occupying power and its obligations to the civilian population.

International humanitarian law is the law that governs the conduct of participants during armed conflict. This branch of law aims to regulate the means and methods of warfare as well as to provide protections to those who do not, or who no longer, take part in the hostilities. It is one of the oldest branches of international law and one of enduring relevance today. The Oxford Guide to International Humanitarian Law provides a practical yet sophisticated overview of this important area of law. Written by a stellar line up of contributors, drawn from those who not only have extensive practical experience but who are also regarded as leading scholars of the subject, the text offers a comprehensive and authoritative exposition of the field. The Guide provides professionals and advanced students with information and analysis of sufficient depth to enable them to perform their tasks with understanding and confidence. Each chapter illuminates how the law applies in practice, but does not shy away from the important conceptual issues that underpin how the law has developed. It will serve as a first port of call and a regular reference work for those interested in international humanitarian law.

The third edition of this work sets out a comprehensive and analytical manual of international humanitarian law, accompanied by case analysis and extensive explanatory commentary by a team of distinguished and internationally renowned experts.

This book provides an examination of whether there is a legally independent 'principle of humanity' in international humanitarian law.

A theoretical examination of the tense and uncertain relationship between the laws of war and human rights law.

This ePaper approaches looks at the contentious debate surrounding humanitarian intervention through a critical, narratological lens. By questioning the roles cast and identities constituted, in what can could be compared to a theatrical drama, the focus is on given to the unreliable narration by of the most powerful characters on the international stage –, from the US to the UN –, and its impact on the political and legal stances taken in various contexts. On a meta-level, it examines the conditions which that enable this unreliable narration, by pointing to the out a problematic flexibility owing to the flowing from paradoxes and conflation nestled entrenched in human rights rhetoric; and what some deem call a budding ‘humanity’s law’. Attention is meant to be drawn to the power of mental imagery conjured up by intervention narratives, based on the story of saving innocents, as embodiments of humanity. The goal is to foster self-reflection among of the readers of working in humanitarian intervention, within the epistemic community of international lawyers, and beyond. We extend our heartfelt thanks to the Vahabzadeh Foundation for financially supporting the publication of best works by young researchers of the Graduate Institute, giving a priority to those who have been awarded academic prizes for their master’s dissertations.