Skip Navigation


Journal of Conflict and Security Law Advance Access originally published online on August 21, 2007
Journal of Conflict and Security Law 2007 12(2):157-196; doi:10.1093/jcsl/krm010
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
12/2/157    most recent
krm010v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Orakhelashvili, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Journal of Conflict & Security Law © Oxford University Press 2007

Overlap and Convergence: The Interaction Between Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello

Alexander Orakhelashvili*

* LL.M. cum laude (Leiden), Ph.D. (Cantab.); Fellow, Jesus College, Oxford.

Correspondence: alexander.orakhelashvili{at}law.ox.ac.uk


  Abstract

The legal regime governing rights and duties of the aggressor state has been extensively debated since Grotius, and has acquired particular importance after the international community outlawed the recourse to force. Although it is often assumed that the legality of war is irrelevant for the regulation of rights during the armed conflict, state practice, jurisprudence and doctrine have consistently developed the thesis that if the prohibition of the use of force is to be meaningful, the aggressor state shall not be able to claim rights and benefits potentially arising from its commission of the act of aggression. This contribution analyses the conceptual foundations of this argument and its standing within the legal framework. After this, the feasibility of the determination of the aggressor in international conflicts is addressed. At the final stage, this contribution addresses some specific dimensions of aggressor discrimination, in terms of the law of occupation, law of neutrality and the potential response by national courts, notably by reference to public policy and the act of state doctrine.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.