| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Harrison Dinniss, Heather, 1973-
(författare)
-
Cyber Operations in Outer Space
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Outer Space Law. - Woking, Surrey : Globe Law and Business. - 9781911078197 ; , s. 323-333
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 6. |
- Harrison Dinniss, Heather, et al.
(författare)
-
Soldier 2.0 : Military Human Enhancement and International Law
- 2016
-
Ingår i: International Law Studies. - Newport, RI, USA : Stockton Center for the Study of International Law, U.S. Naval War College. - 2375-2831. ; 92, s. 432-482
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Advances in technologies that could endow humans with physical or mental abilities that go beyond the statistically normal level of functioning are occurring at an incredible pace. The use of these human enhancement technologies by the military, for instance in the spheres of biotechnology, cybernetics and prosthetics, raise a number of questions under the international legal frameworks governing military technology, namely the law of armed conflict and human rights law. The article examines these frameworks with a focus on weapons law, the law pertaining to the detention of and by “enhanced individuals,” the human rights of those individuals and their responsibility for the actions they take while under the influence of enhancements.
|
|
| 7. |
- Hayashi, Nobuo
(författare)
-
Do the Good Intentions of European Human Rights Law Really Pave the Road to IHL Hell for Civilian Detainees in Occupied Territory?
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Journal of Conflict and Security Law. - Oxford : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1467-7954 .- 1467-7962. ; 20:1, s. 133-163
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This article cautions against the notion that the good intentions of European human rights law necessarily undermine international humanitarian law. In Al-Jedda, despite some suggestions to the contrary, the European Court did not misconstrue the law of belligerent occupation. The court erred, however, in assuming that the duty of non-detention under Article 5(1) of the European Convention can only be ‘displaced’ by a counter-duty of security detention. Whereas the law of belligerent occupation does not impose such a counter-duty, it does empower the occupation authorities to detain on security grounds, and exercising this power would frustrate observing Article 5(1) and vice versa. The norm conflict was soluble, but the would-be need to modify the scope and/or content of Article 5(1) or the law of belligerent occupation, rendered the European Court ill suited for the task. Nevertheless, the court’s ruling against the UK need not mean that European occupying powers suddenly have no choice but to kill rather than detain without charge (and risk lawsuits later) when countering security threats. On the contrary, the law of belligerent occupation helps the occupiers devise Al-Jedda-compliant detention regimes. The judgment’s repercussions are direr for the internment of prisoners of war.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Hayashi, Nobuo
(författare)
-
Is the Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty Accessible to Umbrella States?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Nuclear Non-Proliferation in International Law - Volume IV. - The Hague : T.M.C. Asser Press. - 9789462652668 - 9789462652675 ; , s. 377-394
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter asserts that States placing themselves under the umbrella of nuclear-weapon States may not join the 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons without being in breach with one of its core provisions. The author considers four questions: How did the Treaty come to include a prohibition on threatened use? What does the prohibition mean for threatened self-defensive use of nuclear weapons under jus ad bellum? Does the prohibition cover nuclear deterrence? Does threatening to use nuclear weapons include threatening to have these weapons used on one’s behalf by its nuclear-armed ally? Whilst promoting universal adherence clearly coheres with the Treaty’s object and purpose, it is doubtful whether such considerations warrant a narrow construal in the hope that umbrella States would accede to the treaty without having to abandon their dependence onextended nuclear deterrence.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hayashi, Nobuo
(författare)
-
The Role and Importance of the Hague Conferences : A Historical Perspective
- 2017
-
Rapport (refereegranskat)abstract
- A period of sustained efforts to codify and develop the rules of war, which began in the mid-nineteenth century, peaked with the 1899 and 1907 Hague Peace Conferences. Participating delegates adopted numerous binding instruments covering various aspects of peaceful dispute settlement and war-fighting. This paper places the two Hague Peace Conferences within the context of humanity’s attempts to regulate warfare. It identifies the main factors that made them successful at the time; shows how these factors have changed over time; and assesses the conferences’ contemporary relevance in view of such changes.
|
|
