東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Reducing the Tension in the Applicat...

Waters, Christopher S.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Reducing the Tension in the Application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to Asymmetric Warfare.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Reducing the Tension in the Application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to Asymmetric Warfare./
作者:	Waters, Christopher S.
出版者:	Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, : 2018,
面頁冊數:	306 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-05C.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International76-05C.
標題:	International law. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10820187

Reducing the Tension in the Application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to Asymmetric Warfare.
Waters, Christopher S.

Reducing the Tension in the Application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to Asymmetric Warfare. - Ann Arbor : ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, 2018 - 306 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-05C.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Queen's University (Canada), 2018.

There are two similar but competing legal regimes in the international domain that protect people: human rights law and humanitarian law. Currently, the two regimes are in tension. In the last four decades, international human rights norms have expanded to occupy the field previously dominated by humanitarian law and have become the primary legal regime for governing the use of force in non-international armed conflict. The reasons are the changing nature of warfare and its participants and slow modernization of humanitarian law conventions. The tension has created divergent standards of interpretation of the two regimes, which has led to the inconsistent application of human rights and humanitarian law norms. Proponents of international human rights law maintain that it is the only regime capable of adequately protecting the victims of violence in non-international armed conflict. They state that the humanitarian law conventions developed to mitigate the deleterious effects of conventional international armed conflict are ineffective in controlling the consequences of contemporary asymmetric warfare. Human rights conventions have much more rigorous protections for those victims, and access to accountability mechanisms. However, the continuing expansion of human rights norms into the realm of armed conflict is ineffective. While humanitarian law norms applicable to non-international armed conflict lack density in topics such the use of lethal force and the treatment of detainees, rejuvenation of humanitarian law would be a more effective solution. Humanitarian norms were specifically developed to moderate the application of lethal means, to protect the victims of armed conflict, and to govern the treatment of detainees. The key to reducing the tension lies in leveraging the fundamental principle of humanity, though the creation of a universal framework for the use of force based on the unifying principle of humanity that would apply to every person, at all times, irrespective of characterization of the conflict. Such a framework must reflect the highest norms of precautions and protection found in both regimes, and must be simple understand and apply.Subjects--Topical Terms:

560784
International law.

Reducing the Tension in the Application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to Asymmetric Warfare.
LDR:03177nmm a2200301 4500 001 2203306
005 20190528084330.5
008 201008s2018 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10820187
035 $a (MiAaPQ)QueensUCan197423947
035 $a AAI10820187
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Waters, Christopher S. $3 3430097
245 1 0 $a Reducing the Tension in the Application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law to Asymmetric Warfare.
260 1 $a Ann Arbor : $b ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, $c 2018
300 $a 306 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 76-05C.
500 $a Adviser: Darryl Robinson.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Queen's University (Canada), 2018.
520 $a There are two similar but competing legal regimes in the international domain that protect people: human rights law and humanitarian law. Currently, the two regimes are in tension. In the last four decades, international human rights norms have expanded to occupy the field previously dominated by humanitarian law and have become the primary legal regime for governing the use of force in non-international armed conflict. The reasons are the changing nature of warfare and its participants and slow modernization of humanitarian law conventions. The tension has created divergent standards of interpretation of the two regimes, which has led to the inconsistent application of human rights and humanitarian law norms. Proponents of international human rights law maintain that it is the only regime capable of adequately protecting the victims of violence in non-international armed conflict. They state that the humanitarian law conventions developed to mitigate the deleterious effects of conventional international armed conflict are ineffective in controlling the consequences of contemporary asymmetric warfare. Human rights conventions have much more rigorous protections for those victims, and access to accountability mechanisms. However, the continuing expansion of human rights norms into the realm of armed conflict is ineffective. While humanitarian law norms applicable to non-international armed conflict lack density in topics such the use of lethal force and the treatment of detainees, rejuvenation of humanitarian law would be a more effective solution. Humanitarian norms were specifically developed to moderate the application of lethal means, to protect the victims of armed conflict, and to govern the treatment of detainees. The key to reducing the tension lies in leveraging the fundamental principle of humanity, though the creation of a universal framework for the use of force based on the unifying principle of humanity that would apply to every person, at all times, irrespective of characterization of the conflict. Such a framework must reflect the highest norms of precautions and protection found in both regimes, and must be simple understand and apply.
590 $a School code: 0283.
650 4 $a International law. $3 560784
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
650 4 $a Alternative dispute resolution. $3 3168470
690 $a 0616
690 $a 0398
690 $a 0649
710 2 $a Queen's University (Canada). $3 1017786
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 76-05C.
790 $a 0283
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2018
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10820187