1,721,043 research outputs found
Drugs as Weapons: Disarmament Treaties Facing the Advances in Biochemistry and Non-Lethal Weapons Technology
No full textI crescenti investimenti odierni nella tecnologia militare non letale e il rapido avanzamento della scienza pongono una significativa sfida all’oggetto e allo scopo del sistema di disarmo fondato sui trattati sulle armi chimiche e biologiche. L’articolo discute se la rivoluzione in atto nelle scienze della vita possa indurre gli Stati ad aggirare il c.d. General Purpose Criterion, incluso in ambedue le convenzioni, che assicura un approccio globale al disarmo biochimico. Emerge in questo contesto la questione dell’utilizzo di agenti chimici antisommossa e degli incapacitanti. E’ importante sottolineare che essi appartengono a due classi distinte di agenti chimici: laddove i primi producono effetti irritanti, i secondi colpiscono il sistema nervoso centrale. L’articolo affronta il complesso problema degli usi non proibiti dalla Convenzione sul disarmo chimico, tentato di rispondere a due quesiti: se sia ammesso l’uso di agenti antisommossa nel corso di un conflitto armato e se altri agenti chimici possano essere ugualmente utilizzati per il controllo dell’ordine pubblico. L’analisi condotta conferma la rilevanza dell’interpretazione giuridica nel risolvere le ambiguità sorte nel presente dibattito sulla non-proliferazione. La conclusione è che gli agenti incapacitanti non soddisfino i criteri quantitativi e qualitativi per le finalità di controllo dell’ordine pubblico.The contemporary growing investment in non-lethal weapons technology and the rapid advance in science and technology pose significant challenges to the object and purpose of the disarmament system based on the conventions on chemical and biological weapons. The paper discusses whether the present revolution in the life sciences might lead States to skirt the so-called General Purpose Criterion included in both the conventions, which assures a comprehensive approach towards biochemical disarmament. The issue of the use of riot control agents and incapacitants arises in this context. It is important to stress that they belong to different classes of agents: while the former are designed to produce local sensory irritant effects, the latter target the human nervous system and other physiological systems. The paper finally addresses the complex problem of the non-prohibited purposes under the CWC, by dealing with the following two questions: whether it is permissible to use riot control agents in a time of armed conflict and whether other chemical agents, apart from riot control agents, can be lawfully used for law enforcement. The analysis conducted here confirms the continuing relevance of legal interpretation in solving the ambiguities of the current non-proliferation debate: the conclusion is that incapacitating agents do not satisfy the qualitative and quantitative requirements for the purpose of ‘law enforcement
The Internal Conflict in Colombia and the Fight against Terrorism: UN Security Council Res.1465 (2003) and Further Developments
No full textStatus of PMCs Personnel in the Laws of War: the Question of Direct Participation in Hostilities
No full textLo status giuridico del personale delle società militari e di sicurezza private nel diritto internazionale dei conflitti armati determina i diritti e i privilegi a loro accordati e le conseguenze giuridiche derivanti dalla condotta di tali individui. Al fine di verificare se essi possano essere considerati combattenti o civili, è importante analizzare la loro relazione con lo Stato che li impiega nonché la funzione che essi svolgono. La questione della diretta partecipazione alle ostilità emerge in questo contesto. L’articolo si concentra sulle attività più controverse dei contractors. Giacché non esiste una definizione precisa della nozione, si analizzano i diversi approcci emersi e si spiega perché un’interpretazione ristretta del termine sia da preferire. Infine, si sostiene che la nozione contribuisce a specificar taluni limiti alla prassi degli Stati di ricorrere a compagnie militari.The legal status of private military and security company personnel under the law of international armed conflicts determines the rights and the privileges afforded by the law and the legal consequences deriving from the conduct of those persons. In order to verify whether they may be considered combatants or civilians, it is important to analyze their relationship with the hiring State as well as the function they perform. The issue of ‘direct participation in hostilities’ arises in this context: the article focuses on the most controversial activities carried out by private contractors. Since a precise definition does not exist, it looks into the different approaches and explains why a narrow interpretation of the term is preferable. Finally, this article argues that the notion contributes to establish specific limits on the State practice of hiring military companie
Are Italian Courts Directly Bound to Give Effect to the Jurisdictional Immunities Judgment?
No full textThe answer to the question of whether Italian courts are directly bound to give effect to the Jurisdictional Immunities decision depends on both the content of the obligations established by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning remedies and the peculiarities of the Italian legal system. While the ICJ affords a certain margin of appreciation to Italy in the implementation of the dispositif, the requirement that judicial decisions infringing Germany’s immunity must cease to have effect confirms a consistent trend towards the expansion of the subjective scope of ICJ judgments. The problem of whether action by either the executive or the legislative branches of government is an essential prerequisite for court implementation of the ICJ judgment should be solved by having regard to both pre-existing domestic judicial proceedings and the hierarchical rank of the obligation to comply under domestic law. It is argued that national courts have to ensure direct application of the Jurisdictional Immunities judgment in ongoing proceedings where no decision has become final. In addition, recent practice shows that even the tension between the duty to comply and the principle of res judicata might be resolved by the judiciary, giving prevalence to the former
The Privatisation of ‘the Core Business of un Peacekeeping Operations’: Any Legal Limit?
No full text
- …
