Users without a subscription are not able to see the full
content. Please,
subscribe
or
login
to access all content.
Contents
- Preliminary Material
- Dedication
- Note
- Foreword
- Introduction
- Acknowledgements
- Contents—Summary
- Contents
- List of Abbreviations
- Table of Cases
- National Courts
- African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
- European Commission of Human Rights
- European Court of Human Rights
- Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
- Inter-American Court of Human Rights
- International Court of Justice
- International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
- International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
- International Military Tribunals
- UN Human Rights Committee
- Table of Treaties
- Other Materials
- Main Text
- Part A State Practice and Legal Doctrine
- I The Notion of ‘Targeted Killing’
- II Current Trend towards Legitimization
- 1 Germany: Limits of Formal Legalization
- 2 Switzerland: Exculpation instead of Legislation
- 3 United Kingdom: ‘Shoot-to-Kill’ Policing
- 4 Israel: State Policy of Targeted Killing
- 5 United States: The Global ‘War on Terrorism’
- III Targeted Killing in Contemporary Legal Doctrine
- IV The Analysis
- Part B Law Enforcement
- V The Paradigm of Law Enforcement
- VI Law Enforcement and the Conventional Human Right to Life
- 1 Protection from ‘Arbitrary’ Deprivation of Life
- 1.1 Conventional Texts
- 1.2 Interpretive Approach to the Term ‘Arbitrary’
- 1.3 Practice of the UN Human Rights Committee
- 1.4 Practice of the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights
- 1.5 Practice of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
- 1.6 Practice of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
- 1.7 Elements of ‘Arbitrariness’
- 2 Protection from ‘Intentional’ Deprivation of Life
- 3 Convergence of Material Scopes
- 4 Derogation from the Conventional Right to Life
- 5 Scope of Applicability of the Conventional Right to Life
- 1 Protection from ‘Arbitrary’ Deprivation of Life
- VII Law Enforcement and the Protection of Life under International Humanitarian Law
- 1 Potential Relevance of International Humanitarian Law for the Law Enforcement Paradigm
- 2 Basic Prohibition on Deprivations of Life
- 3 Example of Personal Jurisdiction: Prisoners of War
- 3.1 Personal Jurisdiction over Prisoners of War
- 3.2 Substantive Protection from Deprivation of Life
- 3.3 Requirement of Sufficient Legal Basis
- 3.4 Requirement of Necessity
- 3.5 Requirement of Proportionality
- 3.6 Requirement of Precaution
- 3.7 Conclusion with Regard to Prisoners of War (Personal Jurisdiction)
- 4 Example of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: Occupied Territories
- 4.1 Prerequisite of ‘Effective Control’
- 4.2 Armed Resistance and the State of Occupation
- 4.3 Basic Rights and Duties of an Occupying Power
- 4.4 Permissible Measures
- 4.5 Legitimate Purposes
- 4.6 Necessity, Proportionality and Precaution
- 4.7 Conclusion for the Context of Occupation (Extraterritorial Jurisdiction)
- 5 Example of Domestic Jurisdiction: Non-International Armed Conflict
- 5.1 Non-International Armed Conflict and Domestic Jurisdiction
- 5.2 Personal Scope of Protection of Article 3 GC I to IV
- 5.3 International Practice with regard to Article 3 GC I to IV
- a) ICJ, Nicaragua Case (1986)
- b) IACiHR, Resolution on Caracoles Community, Bolivia (1982)
- c) IACiHR, Abella (La Tablada) Case, Argentina (1997)
- d) IACiHR, Jesuites in El Salvador Case (1999)
- e) IACiHR, Country Report on Colombia (1999)
- f) UN Special Rapporteur for Rwanda (1994)
- g) UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Executions (1993)
- 5.4 Conclusion for Non-International Armed Conflict (Domestic Jurisdiction)
- 6 Conclusion: The Law Enforcement Paradigm under International Humanitarian Law
- VIII Law Enforcement and the Non-Conventional Human Right to Life
- 1 Lack of Universality of the Conventional Right to Life
- 2 Source of the Non-Conventional Right to Life
- 3 The Customary Nature of the Right to Life
- 4 Substantive Scope of the Non-Conventional Right to Life
- 4.1 Methodological Remarks
- 4.2 Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR)
- 4.3 UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (1979)
- a) State Practice with regard to the Code of Conduct and the Force and Firearms Principles as Reported by the UN Secretary-General
- b) International Practice with regard to the Code of Conduct
- c) Requirement of Sufficient Legal Basis
- d) Requirement of Necessity
- e) Requirement of Proportionality
- f) Requirement of Precaution
- g) Conclusion
- 4.4 UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (1990)
- a) State Practice with regard to the Code of Conduct and the Force and Firearms Principles as Reported by the UN Secretary-General
- b) International Practice with regard to Force and Firearms Principles
- c) Requirement of Sufficient Legal Basis
- d) Requirement of Necessity
- e) Requirement of Proportionality
- f) Requirement of Precaution
- 4.5 Practice of the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions
- a) Relevance of the Special Rapporteur’s Practice
- b) Basis and Universal Scope of the Special Rapporteur’s Mandate
- c) Legal Framework for the Implementation of the Mandate
- d) Interpretation of the Right to Life by the Special Rapporteur
- e) Position of the Special Rapporteur concerning Targeted Killings
- f) Position of the Special Rapporteur concerning ‘Shoot-to-Kill’ Policies
- 4.6 Conclusion
- 5 Territorial Scope of the Non-Conventional Right to Life
- 6 The Peremptory Nature of the Right to Life
- 6.1 Potential Relevance of General Exculpatory Circumstances
- 6.2 Jus Cogens: The Nature of Peremptory Law Recalled
- 6.3 Recognition of Jus Cogens Character of the Right to Life
- 6.4 Conclusion
- IX Permissibility of Targeted Killing as a Method of Law Enforcement
- Part C Hostilities
- X The Paradigm of Hostilities
- 1 The Prerequisite of an Armed Conflict
- 2 The Concept of Hostilities
- 3 The Principle of Military Necessity
- 3.1 Concept and Misconceptions
- 3.2 Definition
- 3.3 Functions
- 3.4 Assessment of Military Necessity in Concrete Operations
- a) Distinction of Military Necessity from Military Convenience
- b) Definite Military Advantage
- c) Concrete and Direct Military Advantage
- d) Proportionality ( lato sensu ) as a General Principle of International Law
- e) Between Reasonable and Absolute Necessity
- f) Qualitative, Quantitative and Temporal Aspects of Necessity
- 3.5 Tolerance for Error of Judgement
- 3.6 Conclusion
- 4 Relevant Normative Frameworks and Provisions
- XI The Principle of Distinction under International Humanitarian Law
- 1 Basic Outline of the Principle
- 2 International Armed Conflict
- 3 Non-International Armed Conflict
- 4 Direct Participation in Hostilities
- 4.1 Preliminary Clarifications
- 4.2 Lack of Definition
- 4.3 Substantive Scope of the Notion
- 4.4 Temporal Scope of Loss of Protection
- 4.5 Presumption of Civilian Protection in Case of Doubt
- 5 Duty to Avoid or Minimize ‘Collateral Damage’
- XII Means and Methods in the Conduct of Hostilities
- XIII Human Rights Law and the Paradigm of Hostilities
- XIV Permissibility of Targeted Killing as a Method of Conducting Hostilities
- X The Paradigm of Hostilities
- Part D Conclusions
- Part A State Practice and Legal Doctrine
- Further Material
- Appendix
- Selected Case Descriptions
- Case No. 1: McCann, Savage and Farrell (United Kingdom, 1988)
- Case No. 2: Khalil al-Wazir — ‘Abu Jihad’ (Israel, 1988)
- Case No. 3: Yahya Ayash (Israel, 1996)
- Case No. 4: Khalid Mashal (Israel, 1997)
- Case No. 5: Ewald K. (Switzerland, 2000)
- Case No. 6: Khattab (Russia, 2002)
- Case No. 7: Salah Shehadeh (Israel, 2002)
- Case No. 8: Mohammed Ishtawi Abayat (Israel, 2002)
- Case No. 9: Qaed Senyan al-Harithi (United States/Yemen, 2002)
- Case No. 10: Saddam Hussein (United States, 2003)
- Case No. 11: Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev (Russia, 2004)
- Case No. 12: Sheik Ahmed Yassin (Israel, 2004)
- Case No. 13: Abdel Aziz Rantisi (Israel, 2004)
- Case No. 14: Nek Mohammad (Pakistan, 2004)
- Case No. 15: Rafik Hariri (Syria/Lebanon, 2005)
- Case No. 16: Haitham al-Yemeni (United States/Pakistan, 2005)
- Case No. 17: Jean Charles de Menezes (United Kingdom, 2005)
- Case No. 18: Rigoberto Alpizar (United States, 2005)
- Case No. 19: Ayman al-Zawahiri (United States, 2006)
- Case No. 20: Abu Musab al-Zarqawi (United States/Iraq, 2006)
- Selected Case Descriptions
- Bibliography
- Index
- Appendix
