No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Rule of Law and Human Rights in the Balkans
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 March 2016
Summary
The author considers the application of relevant human rights provisions to the Balkans both historically and in terms of contemporary issues. In particular, he discusses the legality of the measures taken under the auspices of NATO in respect of Kosovo and queries whether such measures are able to remedy such a breakdown of civil administration and respect for human rights. In the author's view, in such circumstances, administration of a country by the United Nations itself provides the only viable alternative.
- Type
- Notes and Comments / Notes et commentaries
- Information
- Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international , Volume 37 , 2000 , pp. 223 - 256
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Canadian Council on International Law / Conseil Canadien de Droit International, representing the Board of Editors, Canadian Yearbook of International Law / Comité de Rédaction, Annuaire Canadien de Droit International 2000
References
This note is based on an address delivered to the 1999 Annual General Meeting of the Canadian section of the International Commission of Jurists.
1 Charter of the United Nations, June 26, 1945, Can. T.S. 1945, No. 7, 5g Stat. 1031, 145 U.K.F.S. 805, art. 2(7).
2 Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, reprinted in Schindler, and Toman, , The Laws of Armed Conflicts (1988) at 63.Google Scholar
3 Geneva Conventions, August 12, 1949, 1125 U.N.T.S. 3; reprinted in Schindler and Toman, supra note 2: Convention I for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field Wounded and Sick in Land Warfare, at 373; Convention II for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, at 401; Convention III Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, at 423; Convention IV Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, at 495 [hereinafter Geneva Conventions].
4 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, June 8, 1977, 1125 U.N.T.S. 3; reprinted in Schindler and Toman, supra note 2: Additional Protocol I Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflict, at 621 [hereinafter Additional Protocol I]; and Additional Protocol II Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflict, at 689 [hereinafter Additional Protocol II].
5 Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, 1996, 35 I.L.M. 809.
6 Columbia Encyclopedia, 5th edition (1975) at 234.
7 Treaty of Berlin, B.F.S.P. 749, 153 C.T.S. 172.
8 Ibid., Bulgaria, Artide V; Montenegro, Artide XXVII; and Serbia, Ardele XXXV.
9 See, for example, Dadrian, , “Genocide As a Problem of National and International Law: The World War I Armenian Case and Its Contemporary Legal Implications” (1989) 14 Yale J. Int’t Law 221.Google Scholar
10 Peace Treaty of Sèvres, August 10, 1920, reprinted in Israel, Major Peace Treaties of Modern History, 1648-1967, volume 3 (1967) at 2055.
11 Treaty of Lausanne, July 24, 1923, reprinted in Israel, supra note 10, volume 4 at 2301.
12 George, Lloyd, The Truth about the Peace Treaties (1938) at 1363–64 and 1365.Google Scholar
13 See Green, , “Protection of Minorities in the League of Nadons and the United Nations,” in Gotlieb, , ed., Human Rights, Federalism, and Minorities (1970) at 180 and 185–92Google Scholar; see also Robinson, , Were the Minorities Treaties a Failure? (1943).Google Scholar
14 9 L.N.T.S. 173, art. 5
15 Hudson, , International Legislation (1931) at 733, Article 5.Google Scholar
16 Minority Schooh in Albania (1935), P.C.I.J. Ser. A/B, No. 64 at 3; Hudson, , World Court Reports (1938) at 484 and 498.Google Scholar
17 German Settlers in Poland (1923), P.C.I.J. Ser. Β, No. 6 at 1; see also Hudson, supra note 16 at 218.
18 lL.N.T.S. 67.
19 Greco-Bulgarian “Communities” (1930), P.C.I.J. Ser. Β, No. 17 [hereinafter Greco-Bulgarian “Communities”].
20 Ibid.
21 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, December 9, 1948, 78 U.N.T.S. 1021 (1951), 277 [hereinafter Genocide Convention].
22 Greco-Bulgarian “Communities,” supra note 19; cited in Hudson, supra note 16 at 653-4.
23 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States, G.A. Res. 2625 (XXV), 1970 [hereinafter Friendly Relations Declaration].
24 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, G.A Res. 1514 (XV), 1960.
25 Ibid, at para. 6.
26 Friendly Relations Declaration, supra note 23, The Principle of Equal Rights and Self-Determination of Peoples.
27 Memorandum, Legal Bureau, Canadian Department of External Affairs, August 20, 1982; reprinted in (1983) 21 C.Y.I.L.318.
28 Memorandum, Legal Bureau, Canadian Department of External Affairs, June 2, 1989; reprinted in (1989) 27 C.Y.I.L. 378.
29 For a short account of the background to these conflicts, as well as the historic rivalries, see, for example, Bassiouni, The Law of the International Criminal Tribunal for theFormer Yugoslavia (1996), Chapteri, “Background of the Conflict.”
30 See, for example, Green, , “Enforcement of the Law in International and Non-International Conflicts: The Way Ahead,” in Green, , Essays on the Modern Law of War, 2 nd edition (1999), Chapter 10.Google Scholar
31 Green, , “The Law of War in Historical Perspective,” in Schmitt, , ed., The Law of Military Operations (1998) at 39.Google Scholar
32 Vattel, Le Droit des Gens, Carnegie translation (1916 [originally published in 1758]) at 7, “Introduction.”
33 Artide 2(7).
34 Geneva Conventions, supra note 3.
35 See, for example, Schwarzenberger, , International Law, volume 1 (1957) at 4478 Google Scholar; and his article “Fundamental Principles of International Law” (1955) 87 Hague Recueil 195, 290 ff.
36 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, 1155 U.N.T.S. 331, reprinted in 81.L.M. 679.
37 Corfu Channel: Merits, [1949] I.C.J. Rep. 4 at 22.
38 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, [1996] I.C.J.Rep. 14, para. 218 [hereinafter Nicaragua].
39 Additional Protocol II, supra note 4.
40 Bothe, , Partsch, , and Solf, , New Rules for Victims of Armed Conflicts (1982) at 651.Google Scholar
41 Nicaragua, supra note 38.
42 Charter Establishing the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, reprinted in Schindler and Toman, supra note 2 at g 11.
43 See, for example, Schwelb, , “Crimes against Humanity” (1946) 23 Brit. Y.B. Int'l Law 178 and 205Google Scholar; see also Dinstein, , “Crimes against Huimanity.” in Makarczyk, , Theory of International Law at the Threshold of the Twenty-First Century (1997) at 891.Google Scholar
44 See, for example, Green, , “The Control of Barbarism in International Law,” in Macdonald, et al., eds., The International Law and Policy of Human Welfare (1978) at 239.Google Scholar
45 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, 13 I.L.M. 50.
46 This seems to have been taken from an interim report, since this wording does not appear in S.C. Doc. 8/1994/674 of May 27, 1994; but it forms a summary of sections 84-86 of the final report.
47 Interim Report of the Commission of Experts, S.C. Doc. S/1994/1125, October 4, 1094> 23-5•
48 Genocide Convention, supra note 21.
49 Ibid, at article 1 [emphasis added].
50 Ibid, at article 2 [emphasis added].
51 See, for example, Green, , “Drazun Erdemovic: The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Action” (1997) 10 Leiden J. Int’l Law 363 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Green, , “Erdemovic — Tadić — Dokmanovic: Jurisdiction and Early Practice of the Yugoslav War Crimes Tribunal” (1997) 27 Israel Y.B. Human Rights 313.Google Scholar
52 Genocide Convention, supra note 21 at Article 2.
53 Additional Protocol II, supra note 4 at Article 3.
54 S.C. Res. 955, 1994, Annex, 33 I.L.M. 1598.
55 “The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression, and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
56 “Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.”
57 “In order to prevent an aggravation of the situation, the Security Council may, before making the recommendations or deciding upon the measures provided for in Article 39, call upon the parties concerned to comply with such provisional measures as it deems necessary or desirable.”
58 “The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.”
59 Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-T, October 2, 1995, 35 I.L.M. 32 at paras. 30 and 32-40.
60 Ibid, at para. 70.
61 Tadić Sentencing judgment, Case No.IT-g4-i-T,July 14, 1997, at para. 8.
62 Maddox, , “The 80 Days War,” The Times (London) (July 15, 1999) at 43.Google Scholar
63 Ibid, at 44.
64 Uniting for Peace Resolution, “Acheson Plan,” Res. 377 (V), November 3,1950.
65 Charter of the United Nations, supra note 1 at Article 18(2).
66 North Atlantic Treaty, April 4, 1949, 34 U.N.T.S. 243.
67 Geneva Conventions, supra note 3 [emphasis added].
68 Nuremberg Judgment, H.M.S.O. Cmd. 6964 (1946) 65, reprinted in (1947) 41 Am. J. Int'l Law at 248-9.
69 Cited in Green, , “’Unnecessary Suffering,’ Weapons Conctrol and the Law of War,” in Essays on the Modern Law of War (1999).Google Scholar
70 Hall, , Treatise on International Law, edited by Higgins, (1924 [originally published in 1895) at 342–4Google Scholar [emphasisadded].
71 Westlake, , International Law, Part I, “Peace” (1910) at 318–20Google Scholar
72 Cited in Moore, , Digest of International Law, volume 6 (1906) at 32 [emphasis added].Google Scholar
73 Stowell, , International Law (1931) at 349 and 352Google Scholar [emphasis added]; see also his text Intervention in International Law (1921) at 51-277.
74 Globe and Mail (Toronto) (August 23, 1999).
75 Evans, “NATO Bombs Still Killing Kosovans,” The Times (London) (August 16, 1999).
76 Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, amended 1996, 35 I.L.M. 1206, reprinted in Schindler and Toman, supra note 2 at 179 at 185.
77 Ibid, at Article 2(4).
78 Ibid, at Article 10.
79 See, for example, Fenrick, , “The Rule of Proportionality and Protocol I in Conventional Warfare” (1982) 98 Mil. Law Rev. 91.Google Scholar
80 Additional Protocol I, supra note 4 at Article 85(3) (a) and (b).
81 Jenkins, , “A Victory for Cowards,” The Times (London), (June 11,1999).Google Scholar
82 The Times (London), (August 7, 1999).
83 The Times (London), (June 15, l999).
84 The Times (London), (August 14, 1999).
85 Canadian Council on International Law, “Lessons from the Past Blueprints for the Future,” 26th Annual Conference, Proceedings (1997) at 31 and 37. See also CCIL, “International Peace and Security,” Twenty-third Annual Conference, Proceedings (1994) 6 at 26.