International law has long differentiated between international and non-international armed conflicts, traditionally regulating the former far more comprehensively than the latter. This is particularly stark in the case of detention, where the law of non-international armed conflict contains no rules on who may be detained, what processes must be provided to review their detention, and when they must be released. Given that non-international armed conflicts are now the most common form of conflict, this is especially worrying, and the consequences of this have been seen in the detention practices of states such as the US and UK in Iraq and Afghanistan. This book provides a comprehensive examination of the procedural rules that apply to detention in non-international armed conflict, with the focus on preventive security detention, or 'internment'. All relevant areas of international law, most notably international humanitarian law and international human rights law, are analysed in detail and the interaction between them explored. The book gives an original account of the relationship between the relevant rules of IHL and IHRL, which is firmly grounded in general international law scholarship, treating the issue as a matter of treaty interpretation. With that in mind, and with reference to State practice in specific non-international armed conflicts - including those in Sri Lanka, Colombia, Nepal, Afghanistan, and Iraq - it is demonstrated that the customary and treaty obligations of States under human rights law continue, absent derogation, to apply to detention in non-international armed conflicts. The practical operation of those rules is then explored in detail. The volume ends with a set of concrete proposals for developing the law in this area, in a manner that builds upon, rather than replaces, the existing obligations of States and non-State armed groups.

Atrocities such as genocide or crimes against humanity are usually committed by a large number of perpetrators. Moreover, those who masterminded the crimes may not have actively participated. This book sets out how these people can be held responsible for their crimes by international criminal tribunals.

The 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (Safety Convention) was the first multilateral convention to deal specifically with the protection of personnel engaged in peace operations. It should be viewed against the background of the increasingly volatile environments in which peace operation personnel were required to operate at the beginning of the 1990s. An Optional Protocol, extending the automatic application of the Safety Convention to new categories of operation, was adopted in December 2005. Protection, which a host government is responsible for securing for personnel in peace operations, may be categorised as general and special protection. The former includes, for example, human rights law and international humanitarian law. The latter comprises privileges and immunities accorded to agents of states or organisations. The contribution of the Safety Convention is mainly one of interstate penal law co-operation. States parties are obligated to co-operate in order to effectively prosecute the perpetrators of stipulated crimes. The protection afforded by the Safety Convention may therefore be categorised as being part of an emerging legal regime against impunity. An effective protection needs to address the specific challenges surrounding peace operations. Some of these challenges, identified in this study, are related to the interplay between the rules of peace and war as well as responsibility and accountability of protected personnel. It is also contended that there is a need for an effective implementation of existing rules, and a careful development of so-called status-of-forces agreements applicable in peace operations.

ÔInternational criminal justice indeed is a crowded field. But this edited collection stands well above the crowd. And it does so with dignity. Through interdisciplinary analysis, the editors skillfully turn shibboleths into intrigues. Theirs is a kaleidoscopic project that scales a gamut of issues: from courtroom discipline, to gender, to the defense, to history. Through vivid deployment of unconventional methods, this edited collection unsettles conventional wisdom. It thereby pushes law and policy toward heartier horizons.Õ Ð Mark A. Drumbl, Washington and Lee University, School of Law, US International criminal justice as a discipline throws up numerous conceptual issues, engaging disciplines such as law, politics, history, sociology and psychology, to name but a few. This book addresses themes around international criminal justice from a mixture of traditional and more radical perspectives. While law, and in particular international law, is at the heart of much of the discussion around this topic, history, sociology and politics are invariably infused and, in some aspects of international criminal justice, are predominant elements. Fundamentally the exploration concerns questions of coherence and legitimacy, which are foundational to both the content and application of the discipline, and the book charts an illuminating path through these diverse perspectives. The contributions in this book come from some of the eminent scholars and practitioners in the area, and will provide some profound insight into and an enriched understanding of international criminal justice, helping to advance the field of study. This ambitious and necessary book will appeal to academics and students of international criminal law, international criminal justice, international law, transitional justice and comparative criminal law, as well as practitioners of international criminal law.

This book provides a modern and basic introduction to a branch of international law constantly gaining in importance in international life, namely international humanitarian law (the law of armed conflict). It is constructed in a way suitable for self-study. The subject-matters are discussed in self-contained chapters, allowing each to be studied independently of the others. Among the subject-matters discussed are, inter alia: the Relationship between jus ad bellum / jus in bello; Historical Evolution of IHL; Basic Principles and Sources of IHL; Martens Clause; International and Non-International Armed Conflicts; Material, Spatial, Personal and Temporal Scope of Application of IHL; Special Agreements under IHL; Role of the ICRC; Targeting; Objects Specifically Protected against Attack; Prohibited Weapons; Perfidy; Reprisals; Assistance of the Wounded and Sick; Definition of Combatants; Protection of Prisoners of War; Protection of Civilians; Occupied Territories; Protective Emblems; Sea Warfare; Neutrality; Implementation of IHL.

Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules is a comprehensive analysis of the customary rules of international humanitarian law applicable in international and non-international armed conflicts. In the absence of ratifications of important treaties in this area, this is clearly a publication of major importance, carried out at the express request of the international community. In so doing, this study identifies the common core of international humanitarian law binding on all parties to all armed conflicts. Comment Don:RWI.

Despite the advances made by the international community to outlaw the resort to force by the United Nations Charter, armed conflicts both international & non-international are a fact of every day life. The civilian casualties from such conflicts have assumed catastrophic proportions. Little attention, however, has been paid by scholars to the treatment of noncombatants in armed conflict & the place in international law of the principle fundamental to the law of armed conflict: noncombatant immunity. This work aims to remedy this omission. The author analyses in detail the content of the customary & conventional rules that give effect to this principle, in both international & non-international armed conflict. The importance of such a study is highlighted by the recent Gulf conflict where so many of the States were not bound by the most recent treaty rules protecting noncombatants.