Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

23 results

Page 1 of 2

  • 13 - Animals in Occupied Territory

  • from Part III - The Protection of Animals in Specific Situations
  • Edited by Anne Peters, Jérôme de Hemptinne, Robert Kolb, Université de Genève
  • Book:
    Animals in the International Law of Armed Conflict
    Published online:
    06 October 2022
    Print publication:
    06 October 2022, pp 217-233

  • Summary

    This chapter explores the international legal protection offered to animals in occupied territory. Some rules of international humanitarian law protecting private and public property apply to animals as well. The legal framework is complemented by the domestic law in force prior to the occupation, and by international conventions on animal conservation that remain applicable during armed conflict. Nonetheless, animals in occupied territory are insufficiently protected. In order to strengthen legal protection, occupying powers should properly fulfil their duty to observe and apply local legislation such as animal welfare statutes. A non-anthropocentric approach based on animals’ needs, rather than on animals as property or as parts of the environment, would help to enhance the protection of animals in occupied territory.

  • The 2021 ECtHR Decision in Georgia v Russia (II) and the Application of Human Rights Law to Extraterritorial Hostilities

  • Marco Longobardo, Stuart Wallace
  • Journal:
    Israel Law Review / Volume 55 / Issue 2 / July 2022
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    25 March 2022, pp. 145-177
    Print publication:
    July 2022
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • This article discusses the findings of the European Court of Human Rights in the 2021 case of Georgia v Russia (II) in relation to the applicability of the European Convention on Human Rights to the conduct of hostilities. The article describes the arguments advanced by the Court to support the idea that the Convention does not apply to extraterritorial hostilities in an international armed conflict. In the light of past decisions, international humanitarian law, international human rights law, and the law of the treaties, it is argued that the Court's conclusion is unconvincing and the arguments seem to be based on extralegal considerations, rather than on a sound interpretation of the notion of state jurisdiction under the Convention.

  • The Legality of Closure on Land and Safe Passage Between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank

  • Marco LONGOBARDO
  • Journal:
    Asian Journal of International Law / Volume 11 / Issue 1 / January 2021
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    21 December 2020, pp. 50-88
    Print publication:
    January 2021

  • This paper explores the legality of the land closure imposed upon the Gaza Strip by Israel. After having considered the area under occupation, the paper argues that the legality of the closure must be determined under international humanitarian law, international human rights law, the principle of self-determination of peoples, and the Israeli-Palestinian agreements. In the light of these rules, the arbitrary closure of the Gaza Strip should be considered illegal because it breaches the unity between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, and because it violates the freedom of movement of the local population. Moreover, the closure breaches the relevant rules pertaining to the transit of goods in occupied territory. The paper concludes that most of the violations caused by the closure affect peremptory rules which produce obligations erga omnes, so that any state in the international community is entitled to react under the law of state responsibility.

Page 1 of 2