Medwis Al-RashidiKuwait University School of Law, Kuwait
P.O. Box 869, Ardiyah, Kuwait
Corresponding Author: profmedwis@hotmail.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The Syrian conflict consists of political and legal components that can be managed under the UN Charter by both political and legal measures. As a result of Russian and Chinese vetoes, the UN Security Council has failed to resolve the conflict by forcible measures, although the Council was able to convene the Geneva II peace talks between the Syrian government and the Syrian opposition on January 24, 2014. The legal aspect of this conflict has been referred to in numerous reports from UN bodies that have emphasized that war crimes have been committed by the Syrian government. Thus, we believe that the UNSC has an obligation to submit this case to a court with appropriate international jurisdiction for its legal resolution. This legal solution should be part of a compromise that satisfies Russia and China pursuant to a Security Council resolution under Chapter VII of the Charter that accompanies the peace talks.
Keywords : Syrian Conflict, UN Security Council, Geneva II peace talks, Geneva Convention, Crimes against Humanity, HRC, IICISAR, Rome Statute
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2014.7.1.06
레이블이 Crimes against Humanity인 게시물을 표시합니다. 모든 게시물 표시
레이블이 Crimes against Humanity인 게시물을 표시합니다. 모든 게시물 표시
2015년 12월 15일 화요일
A Consideration of the so-called Comfort Women Problem in Japan-Korea Relations: Embracing the Difficulties in the International Legal and Policy Debate
Koji Teraya University of Tokyo
Building 3 of Faculty of Law, the University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bukyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan 113-0033.
Corresponding Author: teraya@j.u-tokyo.ac.jp
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The main purpose of this short essay is to mitigate harsh debate about 'comfort women.' Although it is not expected to be resolved in the foreseeable future, understanding the structure of the problem based on the fact-finding and legal analysis would enable the two peoples to seek a better solution. The author claims that: (1) although some of the historical facts remain unclear, and some people tend to focus too much attention on fact-finding, from the viewpoint of international law, sufficient evidence has been revealed to confirm Japan's responsibility for its conduct in the Second World War, and Japan does not and should not deny the relevant historical facts; (2) Japan was absolved of its responsibility by the 1965 Agreement in a legal sense; and (3) having said that, this case reveals the limits of the positivistic legal approach, and the Asian Women's Fund can be one legitimate way of dealing with this problem.
Keywords: Enforced Sexual Slaves, Crimes against Humanity, Reparation for Individual Victims, The 1965 Korea-Japan Agreement, The San Francisco Peace Treaty
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2013.6.1.09
Building 3 of Faculty of Law, the University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bukyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan 113-0033.
Corresponding Author: teraya@j.u-tokyo.ac.jp
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The main purpose of this short essay is to mitigate harsh debate about 'comfort women.' Although it is not expected to be resolved in the foreseeable future, understanding the structure of the problem based on the fact-finding and legal analysis would enable the two peoples to seek a better solution. The author claims that: (1) although some of the historical facts remain unclear, and some people tend to focus too much attention on fact-finding, from the viewpoint of international law, sufficient evidence has been revealed to confirm Japan's responsibility for its conduct in the Second World War, and Japan does not and should not deny the relevant historical facts; (2) Japan was absolved of its responsibility by the 1965 Agreement in a legal sense; and (3) having said that, this case reveals the limits of the positivistic legal approach, and the Asian Women's Fund can be one legitimate way of dealing with this problem.
Keywords: Enforced Sexual Slaves, Crimes against Humanity, Reparation for Individual Victims, The 1965 Korea-Japan Agreement, The San Francisco Peace Treaty
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2013.6.1.09
Remedying "Enforced Sexual Slavery": Validating Victims' Reparation Claims against Japan
Seong Phil Hong Yonsei University School of Law
50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749 Korea.
Corresponding Author: hsphil@gmail.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
It has been over two decades since the Japanese practice of enforced sexual slavery began to receive widespread attention. Yet despite numerous international efforts to urge Japan to squarely acknowledge its moral and legal responsibility, there has been no meaningful progress to resolve this matter. This work revisits the issue of enforced sexual slavery as it stands today. The Japanese practice of enforced sexual slavery was a clear violation of international law at the time. Therefore, individual victims have valid legal claims for reparation against the Japanese government. The first half of this article reconfirms the illegality of the practice of enforced sexual slavery. The remainder summarizes and vindicates the claims of the victims once again. This research suggests how to remedy the victims' rights and discusses how to implement reparation. It also contends that Japan owes reparations and legitimate remedial measures to the victims that go beyond monetary compensation in line with the rules of contemporary international law.
Keywords: Enforced Sexual Slaves, Crimes against Humanity, Reparation for Individual Victims, The 1965 Korea-Japan Agreement, The San Francisco Peace Treaty
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2013.6.1.08
50 Yonsei-ro, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul 120-749 Korea.
Corresponding Author: hsphil@gmail.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
It has been over two decades since the Japanese practice of enforced sexual slavery began to receive widespread attention. Yet despite numerous international efforts to urge Japan to squarely acknowledge its moral and legal responsibility, there has been no meaningful progress to resolve this matter. This work revisits the issue of enforced sexual slavery as it stands today. The Japanese practice of enforced sexual slavery was a clear violation of international law at the time. Therefore, individual victims have valid legal claims for reparation against the Japanese government. The first half of this article reconfirms the illegality of the practice of enforced sexual slavery. The remainder summarizes and vindicates the claims of the victims once again. This research suggests how to remedy the victims' rights and discusses how to implement reparation. It also contends that Japan owes reparations and legitimate remedial measures to the victims that go beyond monetary compensation in line with the rules of contemporary international law.
Keywords: Enforced Sexual Slaves, Crimes against Humanity, Reparation for Individual Victims, The 1965 Korea-Japan Agreement, The San Francisco Peace Treaty
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2013.6.1.08
Dispensation of Justice by the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia: A Critical Appraisal
M. Ehteshamul Bari Manarat International University, Malaysia
Bungalow No-55, Jalan (Street)- 16/2, Section-16, 46350 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Corresponding Author: mebari07@gmail.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
This article examines the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia established to try those responsible for the atrocities perpetrated against the Cambodian people by the former Khmer Rouge Regime (1975-1979). It focuses on the trial of the first case conducted by the ECCC which resulted in the 'lenient' judgment. The paper then outlines in details the factors such as political interference, corrupt practices and inordinate delay of the legal process which are undermining the ECCC's credibility to administer fair justice to the victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Finally, it stresses on the fact that the failure of the ECCC and its stakeholders to duly address these fundamental issues would end in the farcical dispensation of justice.
Keywords : ECCC, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, Genocide, Political Interference, Corruption and Inordinate Delay
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2011.4.1.10
Bungalow No-55, Jalan (Street)- 16/2, Section-16, 46350 Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
Corresponding Author: mebari07@gmail.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
This article examines the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia established to try those responsible for the atrocities perpetrated against the Cambodian people by the former Khmer Rouge Regime (1975-1979). It focuses on the trial of the first case conducted by the ECCC which resulted in the 'lenient' judgment. The paper then outlines in details the factors such as political interference, corrupt practices and inordinate delay of the legal process which are undermining the ECCC's credibility to administer fair justice to the victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Finally, it stresses on the fact that the failure of the ECCC and its stakeholders to duly address these fundamental issues would end in the farcical dispensation of justice.
Keywords : ECCC, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, Genocide, Political Interference, Corruption and Inordinate Delay
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2011.4.1.10
The Iraqi Special Tribunal under International Humanitarian Law
Ali Adnan Alfeel University of Mosul, Iraq
P.O. Box 11095, Department of Public Law, University of Mosul, Iraq
Corresponding Author: alialfeel1969@yahoo.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The creation of the Iraqi Special Tribunal in December 2003 by Iraqi authorities who were at the time under the legal occupation of the Coalition Provisional Authority marked the emergence of a new form of internationalized domestic tribunals. The Iraqis succeeded in incorporating the full range of modern crimes into their domestic codes alongside some carefully selected domestic offenses, while amending domestic procedural law in some key ways to align the process with established international law related to the provision of full and fair trials. The subsequent investigations and the beginning of trial proceedings generated major debates about the legitimacy of such a domestic forum within the context of human rights norms and the law of occupation. In particular, there was a major strand of thought from outside Iraq that the most legitimate and appropriate forum would have been an international process under the authority of the United Nations. This article examines the arguments made by the Iraqis who demanded a domestic process based on their inquisitorial model, setting them in the broader context of the emerging trends in international criminal law. Through a detailed and unique analysis of the provisions of human rights law and underlying Iraqi procedural law, it criticizes the arguments made by some that assume the illegitimacy of the tribunal under established international norms. The article provides the most detailed explanation of the law of occupation as it emerged following World War II to conclude that the establishment of the Tribunal as an independent court, and its subsequent validation by sovereign Iraqi domestic authorities, was completely valid and proper. The overarching theme of the article is that the imposition of artificial standards and the complete revocation of the preexisting Iraqi judicial structures would have created a process deemed wholly illegitimate by the Iraqi people and judiciary that would have undermined the establishment of the rule of law in Iraq. The author's personal interactions with the judges serve to support the conclusion that the Tribunal is capable of serving as the doorway through which the detailed body of international criminal law is introduced to the broader Arabic speaking world.
Keywords : Complementarity, Genocide, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, International Humanitarian Law.
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2009.2.1.01
P.O. Box 11095, Department of Public Law, University of Mosul, Iraq
Corresponding Author: alialfeel1969@yahoo.com
ⓒ Copyright YIJUN Institute of International Law
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The creation of the Iraqi Special Tribunal in December 2003 by Iraqi authorities who were at the time under the legal occupation of the Coalition Provisional Authority marked the emergence of a new form of internationalized domestic tribunals. The Iraqis succeeded in incorporating the full range of modern crimes into their domestic codes alongside some carefully selected domestic offenses, while amending domestic procedural law in some key ways to align the process with established international law related to the provision of full and fair trials. The subsequent investigations and the beginning of trial proceedings generated major debates about the legitimacy of such a domestic forum within the context of human rights norms and the law of occupation. In particular, there was a major strand of thought from outside Iraq that the most legitimate and appropriate forum would have been an international process under the authority of the United Nations. This article examines the arguments made by the Iraqis who demanded a domestic process based on their inquisitorial model, setting them in the broader context of the emerging trends in international criminal law. Through a detailed and unique analysis of the provisions of human rights law and underlying Iraqi procedural law, it criticizes the arguments made by some that assume the illegitimacy of the tribunal under established international norms. The article provides the most detailed explanation of the law of occupation as it emerged following World War II to conclude that the establishment of the Tribunal as an independent court, and its subsequent validation by sovereign Iraqi domestic authorities, was completely valid and proper. The overarching theme of the article is that the imposition of artificial standards and the complete revocation of the preexisting Iraqi judicial structures would have created a process deemed wholly illegitimate by the Iraqi people and judiciary that would have undermined the establishment of the rule of law in Iraq. The author's personal interactions with the judges serve to support the conclusion that the Tribunal is capable of serving as the doorway through which the detailed body of international criminal law is introduced to the broader Arabic speaking world.
Keywords : Complementarity, Genocide, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, International Humanitarian Law.
The Full Text is available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.14330/jeail.2009.2.1.01
피드 구독하기:
글 (Atom)