HUMAN RIGHTS IN TIMES OF ARMED CONFLICTS

The present contribution deals with the issue of human rights in armed conflicts versus the concept of war. This distinction was made in Article 2, and the same in all four Geneva Convention of 1949. In this article, the distinction is made between the universal system of human rights and the International Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflicts (IHLAC). The difference of application between these two sets of law relies on the fact, that the universal agreements of human rights always apply, both in armed conflict and peace when the IHLAC applies only in times of armed conflicts. There is a difference between them in the regulation. Human rights regulate the relationship between the state and persons under its jurisdiction, regardless of their nationality and the IHLAC applies to states and individuals or armed groups distinguishing between a civilian or a veteran. About the compliance control, it is a different system too, for the IHLAC, it is the ICRC and criminal tribunals, and for human rights, there are different committees of tribunals like the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The exam of the jurisprudence of the ECtHR shows, that it does not make a distinction between a state of war and peace, which is called the humanization of the law of armed conflicts. Also, the very important question of the fragmentation of international law is examined, based on the jurisprudence of the ICJ.

TANGGUNG JAWAB NEGARA ATAS DIGUNAKANNYA SENJATA SPACE-BASED MISSILE INTERCEPTOR SEBAGAI BENTUK UPAYA SELF-DEFENSE DARI NEGARA PENYERANG TERHADAP NEGARA PIHAK KETIGA DITINJAU DARI HUKUM INTERNASIONAL

Self-defense as an inherent right owned by a country is regulated in Article 51 of the UN Charter and due to the use of Space-Based Missile Interceptor (SBMI) weapons in space, the 1967 outer space treaty must also be guided. Because Article 4 of the 1967 Outer Space Treaty prohibits the use of weapons in space, the legality of using SBMI weapons is questionable. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the legal provisions, forms of state accountability and the process of prosecuting compensation for countries using these weapons according to international law. The results of the study indicate that the use of SBMI weapons does not conflict with international law, because it is based on Article 103 of the UN Charter which states that if there are provisions in other legal rules that are contrary to the UN Charter, the UN Charter must be guided. So that self-defense actions based on Article 51 of the UN Charter do not violate the law. The party that must be absolutely responsible is the country that started the conflict, because it has violated the rules of international law in Article 2 paragraph (4) of the UN Charter and international humanitarian law. The compensation process is carried out according to the rules of the space liability convention 1972 and if in practice the party who is responsible does not show good faith in providing compensation, then it can be continued by referring to the dispute resolution process in the UN Charter.

Man against machine: Debates in the expert community on the lethal autonomous systems

In the recent years debates surrounding the autonomous weapons systems development and regulation have gained a new momentum. Despite the fact that the development of such type of weapons continues since the twentieth century, recent technological advances open up new possibilities for development of completely autonomous combat systems that will operate without human in-tervention. In this context, international community faces a number of ethical, legal, and regulatory issues. This paper examines the ongoing debates in both the Western and the Russian expert community on the challenges and prospects for using lethal autonomous systems. The author notes that Russian and Western discourses on most of the issues have very much in common and diff erences are found mainly in the intensity of debates — in the West they are much more ac-tive. In both cases the most active debates focus around two issues: the potential implications of fully autonomous weapons systems including the unclear line of accountability, and the prospects for international legal regulation of the use of lethal autonomous weapons. Both the Russian and the Western experts agree that the contemporary international humanitarian law is unable to handle the challenges posed by aggressive development of the lethal autonomous weapons. All this points to the need to adapt the international humanitarian law to the new realities, which, in turn, requires concerted actions from leading states and international organizations.

Human Rights Protection in Occupied Territories

The chapter discusses the protection mechanisms of human rights in occupied territories, namely it concerns the issue of application of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in occupied territories. The author gives detailed information about the main system for administration of occupied territories, in particular about the conventional and customary law, as well as secondary resources such as court decisions and UN resolutions. The chapter analyses international treaties, customary law, and case law to identify the main problems related to human rights protection in occupied territories, the positive obligations of states to protect population living in occupied territories, and the relevance of existing legal norms with the state practice.

Humanitarian diplomacy

Problem setting. Ensuring constant access to humanitarian aid during military conflicts and complex emergencies has always been an important issue for politicians. Its solution is to guarantee the protection of civilians in times of danger and political instability. The practice of humanitarian negotiations led to the emergence of the concept of humanitarian diplomacy in the early 2000s. It was to persuade community leaders and high-ranking decision-makers to act in the interests of vulnerable populations in accordance with humanitarian principles. Humanitarian diplomacy is carried out by humanitarian actors and includes the organization of a safe presence of humanitarian organizations, access to negotiations with the civilian population, monitoring assistance programs, and respect for international law. The development of humanitarian aspects of diplomacy is linked to the protection of the most vulnerable groups – ethnic and religious minorities, women, children, refugees, victims of armed conflict, terrorism and environmental disasters. An important task facing scholars is to study the nature of diplomacy, the history of its development, as well as modern models and tools. Scholars draw attention to the need to return in international relations to the philosophy of morality and values. In our opinion, it is expedient to define the concept of humanitarian diplomacy, to show the formation and development of humanitarian diplomacy and the institute of humanitarian law, to consider the problems of humanitarian activity in the modern world. Analysis of recent researches and publications. K. Schmitt, H. Arendt, M. Foucault, D. Agamben, D. Butler, ES Gromoglasova, TV Zonova, OF Rusakova studied the strategic dimension of humanitarian diplomacy and humanitarian law in their works. In addition, the famous works of domestic scientists such as VF Antipenko, M. Gnatovsky, V. Gutnik, T. Korotky, A. Talalaev, O. Tiunov, I. Lukashuk, J. Zhukorska and others. Target of research is to define the concept of “humanitarian diplomacy”, analyze the historical development of the concept of humanitarian law and diplomacy, describe the current problems of functioning. Article’s main body. The article examines the prerequisites and features of the formation of humanitarian diplomacy and humanitarian law. The authors try to give a modern definition of “humanitarian diplomacy, analyze the historical development of the concept of international humanitarian law and diplomacy.” The role of international organizations in the implementation of humanitarian aid to vulnerable groups during armed conflicts is highlighted, the current problems of humanitarian diplomacy are described. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Given the above, the authors can conclude that the ways of formation and development of humanitarian diplomacy were quite difficult. Only in the middle of the XIX century were the norms and principles on the basis of which vulnerable groups are protected; the first international legal acts of humanitarian law were adopted; international organizations have sprung up to provide humanitarian assistance to all those in need. In modern conditions, in our opinion, humanitarian diplomacy is becoming a key element in providing assistance to all vulnerable groups, which is provided by many actors, such as states, international organizations, ordinary people and their initiatives.

Methodology of regulation of new types of weapons by means of international humanitarian law: emergence and development

The purpose of the article is to identify the methodology, used in international humanitarian law for the regulation of new types of weapons. Under the settlement of the objectives of the article, regulation is understood as the establishment of permits, prohibitions and restrictions on the use of this type of weapon in accordance with the basic principles of international humanitarian law. The article is methodologically based on the works of foreign and Ukrainian researchers, devoted to the problems of the settlement of new weapons systems in international humanitarian law. The empirical basis of the article was formed by international treaties in the field of international humanitarian law and codified customs of this industry, as reflected in the codifications, developed by the International Committee of the Red Cross. The article establishes that in international humanitarian law there is an obligation for states to assess the compliance of new weapons systems with international humanitarian law. At the same time, this norm has two disadvantages. First, it is too abstract, which allows states to avoid the obligation to assess each time with reference to the fact that a certain type of weapon does not fall under the definition of a new type of weapon. Secondly, international humanitarian law does not contain specific mechanisms to hold violating states accountable. It is concluded, that it is necessary to revise the current international legal regulation of the obligation to assess new weapons systems in the direction of its concretization and strengthening of responsibility for non-compliance. Corresponding changes can be made to the Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of 1977, or introduced by adopting a separate protocol.

Illegal Control Over the Territory in International Law and the Status of Donbas Determination

Total rejection of the aggression and territory occupation in the international law leads to their hybrid and concealed forms using gangs and mercenaries, proclaiming new “states” etc. These activities constitute serious threat to international security, can cause and already cause the fragmentation of states, anarchy, criminalization of politics, new forms of expansionism and so on. The authors of the article generalize the forms of illegal control over the territory in international law and their application considering the status of Donbas determination. International law for more than a century provides for the possibility of separate regulation of the sovereignty and legal rights of the state to the territory, on the one hand, and the implementation of the regime of illegal control over the territory – on the other. Authors argue that in the modern sense, primarily developed by doctrine and courts, illegal control over the territory can be considered as a legal regime, one of the forms of which is occupation, while others are defined as effective, overall, general, de facto control and related to undisclosed actions and informal means used by the aggressor states. This regime is characterized by the exercise of power over the territory by the will of a foreign state, and the forms of implementation of the regime differ depending on whether such a will is officially recognized or concealed. The transformation of international humanitarian law after the Second World War erased the boundaries between recognized and officially unrecognized occupation. But unlike occupation, the fact of which may be obvious, the fact of effective or other control over the territory requires the determination by judicial authorities. The qualification of illegal control by the Russian Federation of the Donbas in national and international law is ambiguous. The authors argue that the full recognition of the international armed conflict between Ukraine and Russia in Donbas, as well as Russia’s illegal control over latter should be expected in the process of consideration of a number of cases in the international judicial institutions.

International Environmental Protection in Armed Conflicts: Traditional Legal Regulation and Interpretation Novelties

The paper is devoted to international legal protection of the environment during armed conflicts. The author emphasizes that armed conflicts, both international and non-international, continue to be one of the most serious threats to a healthy environment. An armed conflict taking place in the environment invariably poses a threat to ecosystems.The author summarizes that in international law there are special norms for the protection of natural environment during armed conflicts. At the same time, increasing the level of protection requires a clearer definition of the scope of application of customary law and the further development of treaty rules. While the objectives of protecting the natural environment are linked to the survival and protection of civilians, recognition of environmental protection during armed conflict as such constitutes an important trend. International law calls on States to enter into agreements that provide for additional protection of the natural environment during armed conflicts. The concept of “protecting the natural environment” in international humanitarian law refers to a wide range of obligations that can help protect the natural environment or its parts from damage. A high threshold for potential harm continues to pose the risk that such protection is not fully applicable in practice. There is an obvious tendency to use the potential of the principles of international environmental law when applying the norms of international humanitarian law. Thus, even in cases where the assessment of new means and methods of warfare does not provide scientific certainty with regard to their impact on the natural environment, this does not absolve the parties to the conflict from taking appropriate precautions. It is not enough that there are important rules of international humanitarian law protecting the natural environment during armed conflict; they need to be better disseminated, implemented and enforced, as well as validated and clarified.