Holdings Information
Proportionality in international law / Michael Newton, Vanderbilt University; Larry May, Vanderbilt University.
Bibliographic Record Display
-
Title:Proportionality in international law / Michael Newton, Vanderbilt University; Larry May, Vanderbilt University.
-
Author/Creator:Newton, Michael A., 1962- author.
-
Other Contributors/Collections:May, Larry, author.
-
Published/Created:Oxford, UK ; New York, NY : Oxford University Press, [2014]
-
Holdings
Holdings Record Display
-
Location:LAW LIBRARY (level 3)Where is this?
-
Call Number: K247 .N49 2014
-
Number of Items:1
-
Status:Available
-
Location:LAW LIBRARY (level 3)Where is this?
-
Library of Congress Subjects:Proportionality in law.
-
Description:x, 339 pages ; 25 cm
-
Notes:Includes bibliographical references (pages 305-323) and index.
-
ISBN:9780199355037 (hardback : alk. paper)
0199355037 (hardback : alk. paper)
-
Contents:Machine generated contents note: I. Preliminary Understanding of Jus in Bello Proportionality
II. Example of Friendly Fire between the United States and Pakistan
III. Some Preliminary Directions
I. What is Proportionality at its Most Basic?
II. Comparability and Context
III. Proportionality at the International Criminal Court and Protocol I
IV. Some Additional Examples
V. Proportionality's Paradox: Fixed Standards Assessments Reached Subjectively
I. Limits of Lawful Governance
II. Limits of Lawful State Punishment
III. Regulation of Investor-State Interests
IV. Maritime Delimitation
V. Law of Countermeasures in Trade
VI. State-Imposed Restraints on Human Rights
I. Jus ad Bellum Proportionality
II. Jus in Bello Proportionality
III. Jus Post Bellum Proportionality
IV. Three Just War Proportionality Principles
V. Significance for International Law
I. Framing the Jus in Bello and Jus ad Bellum Legal Debates
II. Origins of Jus in Bello Proportionality
III. Proportionality and Professionalization
IV. Emergence of Proportionality in Treaty Law
V. Lieber Code and Additional Protocol I
VI. International Criminal Court Framing of the Crime of Disproportionate Attacks
I. Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law
II. Worries about Applying Human Rights Law to Armed Conflict
III. Just War Theory and Human Rights
IV. Lex Specialis and Forfeitures
V. Necessity's Relation to Proportionality
VI. Crime of Disproportionate Attack
I. Suitability, Necessity, and Proportionality
II. Commonalities among Different Uses of Proportionality
A. Pervasive Use of Negative Phraseology
B. Breadth of Permissible Discretion
C. What Proportionality is Not
III. What is the Positive Role of Proportionality?
A. Articulation of Cardinal Values
B. Preservation of Space for Second Opinions Reevaluating Discretionary Acts
C. Establishment of a Framework for Interrelation
IV. Why Jus in Bello Proportionality is Unique
A. Context of Armed Conflict
B. Attribution of Acts
C. Permissive Nature of the Jus in Bello Regime
I. Proportionate Countermeasures
II. Examples of Difficult Counterinsurgency Cases
I. Forced Choices
II. International Law and Human Shields
III. Voluntary Human Shields
IV. Involuntary Human Shields
V. Risk and Concern about Civilians
VI. Adjusting the Rules of War so as Not to Favor Oppressors
I. Drone Strikes Controversy
II. Status and Conduct: International Humanitarian Law and Domestic Law Enforcement
III. Controversy over Protocol I
IV. Behavior and Domestic Law Enforcement
V. Law Enforcement, Proportionality, and Due Process
VI. War and the Self-Defensive Killing of Combatants
VII. Targeted Killing and Proportionality in the International Criminal Court
I. Historical Definitions of War
II. Rules of War and Cyberwar
III. Current Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello Proportionality and Cyberspace
IV. Paradigm Shift for Conceptualizing Cyber Attacks
V. Problems of Assimilating Cyber Attacks to a War Paradigm
VI. Concluding Thoughts on Proportionality and Cyberwar
I. Initial Rules of Thumb for Jus in Bello Proportionality
A. Common Denominator Principle
B. Civilian Precautionary Principle
C. Unobserved Target Principle
D. Respect for Fellow Humans Principle
II. Thresholds of Jus in Bello Proportionality
A. Symmetric Status Threshold
B. Jus Imminence and Self-Defense Threshold
C. Extreme Emergency Threshold
D. Preemption or Hostile Action Threshold
E. Controlled Area Threshold
III. Conclusions.