New Search Search History

Holdings Information

    Proportionality in international law / Michael Newton, Vanderbilt University; Larry May, Vanderbilt University.

    • 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

       
    • 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.
    Session Timeout
    New Session