• Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • BMRI Business and Management Research Institute - to April 2016
    • Centre for Research in Law (CRiL)
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • BMRI Business and Management Research Institute - to April 2016
    • Centre for Research in Law (CRiL)
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of UOBREPCommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalDepartmentThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsPublisherJournalDepartment

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    About

    AboutLearning ResourcesResearch Graduate SchoolResearch InstitutesUniversity Website

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    Jaloud v Netherlands and Hassan v United Kingdom: time for a principled approach in the application of the ECHR to military action abroad

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Authors
    Borelli, Silvia
    Issue Date
    2015-05
    Subjects
    M120 European Union Law
    human rights
    European Court of Human Rights
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The aim of the present piece is not to undertake an examination of which of international human rights law (IHRL) and international humanitarian law (IHL) is ‘better’ or more appropriate to regulate the conduct of States in situations of armed conflict. Advocates of IHRL argue that it provides heightened protection for individuals, and that, by its own terms, it applies to, and is perfectly equipped to deal with situations of exception, including armed conflicts.[1] On the other hand, supporters of IHL focus on the need not to place unnecessary fetters upon the freedom of States to pursue their military objectives in situations of armed conflict, and argue that IHL provides an adequate level of protection, whilst being more pragmatic, better suited to the specificities of armed conflict and more likely to be observed by the parties to the conflict.[2] Insofar as they prioritise different values, proponents of the two opposing camps to a large extent talk past each other and the debate is therefore necessarily somewhat sterile.
    Citation
    Borelli, S. (2015) 'Jaloud v Netherlands and Hassan v United Kingdom: Time for a principled approach in the application of the ECHR to military action abroad'. Questions of International Law, 25-43
    Journal
    Questions of International Law
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10547/603614
    Additional Links
    http://www.qil-qdi.org/jaloud-v-netherlands-and-hassan-v-united-kingdom-time-for-a-principled-approach-in-the-application-of-the-echr-to-military-action-abroad/
    Type
    Article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    2284-2969
    Collections
    Centre for Research in Law (CRiL)
    Law

    entitlement

     
    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.