Search: Symposium on the Functional Approach to the Law of Occupation

...its current status as an occupied state. carl meyer Prof. Kontorovich wrote that "For a while, the Palestinians have managed to uniquely claim to best of both worlds". To me it is the occupying power that should no longer be able to have it both ways. The laws of occupation either apply or do not apply. If it is an occupation, it is beyond time for Israel’s custodianship — supposedly provisional — to be brought to an end. If it is not an occupation, there is no justification for denying...

...of effective control has little to do with the concept of effective control in the law of occupation. Effective control in the latter context determines whether the law of occupation applies; it does not determine who the sovereign is in the occupied state. On the contrary, one state’s effective control over the territory of another state does not transfer sovereignty from the government of the occupied state to the occupying state; the government in the occupied state remains the occupied state’s government, even if it loses some of its powers...

...taking the traditional ICTY/ICTR approach, asking whether the Israeli perpetrators of the crimes on the Mavi Marmara are militarily or politically important enough to justify the time and expense of a formal investigation. The PTC, by contrast, does not care about the relative importance of the perpetrators; it simply wants to know whether the OTP can prosecute the individuals who are most responsible for committing the crimes in question. To see the difference between the two approaches — and to see why the OTP’s approach is far better — consider...

...inapplicability of the "law enforcement" paradigm when targetings are justifiable under the laws of war and/or the law of self-defense. The U.S. has claimed lawfulness under the laws of war (which I disagree with regarding targetings outside of the theatre of the real war in Afghanistan and, de facto, parts of Pakistan or regarding targetings of persons who are DPH in connection with that international armed conflict who are located elsewhere) as well as the law of self-defense. Both the AI and HRW reports use the wrong tests and criteria...

...any proposals for ending Chinese occupation of Tibet and Russian occupation of Georgia, no one has suggested that the presence of occupying nationals in those countries is a continued violation of international law. Yes, China violates the GC by shipping Han en masse to Tibet to demographically overwhelm the native population. But has even a law professor suggested their deportation back? When America occupied Iraq, would it have been illegal for Americans of Iraqi ancestry to move back? I believe some did and no one made an issue of it....

you guys are all just too selective in your western-biased perceptions. (surprise, surprise fellas, Turkey is a staunch ally of the west, especially of Obama Administration) Please, just google "Akritas Plan" and maybe we may talk about the reasons of the Turkish operation on the island, which is, as far as I am concerned humanitarian in essence and legally justified (sanctioned by the treaties establishing the Cyprus state and its regime ). This is how the occupation had started. As regards the regime of occupation, why should one occupation be...

Sniff Nice post but this, 'The law that matters to EU constitutional theory is not about the ECB, but instead the European Court of Human Rights' is incorrect. Nick I am afraid for answers you will have to look to EU law journals (European Public Law, European Law Journal, the German EuZW) and books, the blogosphere seems not to have much to offer. There is http://eutopialaw.com/, an eu law blog by the Matrix Chambers, but more for practicioners. Then, for current information and some opinion/analysis there is http://www.euractiv.com/euro-finance and http://euobserver.com/....

formed under belligerent occupation might, if able to establish independence vis-à-vis the occupant, become a State, subject to cessation of hostilities or with recognition by the previous sovereign. Nevertheless, an entity claiming statehood but created during a period of foreign military occupation will be presumed not to be independent. Jurisdiction is a question of law Article 19(1) of the Rome Statute requires the Court to “satisfy itself” that it has jurisdiction. This principle (reflected under customary law by the Court’s inherent Komptenz-Kompetenz), implies that the OTP must “attain the degree...

...the U.S. support for Turkish operations in northern Syria – established that the United States was now a party to a conflict against Syria (any more than earlier U.S. operations had established as much). Ryan responds solely on the matter of U.S./Turkish operations in the north, arguing that an area of northern Syria is now subject to occupation by Turkey, and that the United States is a “co-belligerent” with Turkey in this occupation. Let me begin with an area of agreement – that if one state occupies the territory of...

Law and the American Journal of International Law. He served as dean and professor at various universities and was an advisor to the U.S. administration. He had a decisive influence on the literature concerning international law as the editor of the series “Classics of International Law,” reissuing the public lectures of Francisco de Vitoria. In his academic publications, he promoted the narrative that the Spanish school of international law in the sixteenth century, and especially its founder, Francisco de Vitoria, laid the foundations for an international law that would become...

seizure was for security concerns, the High Court of Justice ruled that: …the military commander was authorized—by the international law applicable to an area under belligerent occupation—to take possession of land, if this is necessary for the needs of the army…The infringement of property rights is insufficient, in and of itself, to take away the authority to build it. It is permitted, by the international law applicable to an area under belligerent occupation, to take possession of an individual’s land in order to erect the separation fence upon it, upon...

...and fall within the command structure of the groups Israel is engaged in hostilities with in Gaza; loose claims of affiliation do not suffice for this purpose. An alternative argument would be that since an occupation is a type of IAC, any use of force in occupied territory is subject to the legal framework regulating hostilities. However, this position must be clearly rejected, as hostilities are not necessary for a state of occupation to come into being or to continue, and the law of occupation imposes a duty on the...