The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies

Due to the ECHR’s decision regarding the request for interim measures lodged by Armenia against Azerbaijan with respect to an armed conflict, the issue of giving international humanitarian law (IHL) relevance through the jurisprudence of regional human rights bodies has recently become relevant once...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ana Jabauri
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Constitutional Court of Georgia 2020-11-01
Series:Journal of Constitutional Law
Subjects:
ihl
Online Access:https://constcourt.ge/files/7/JCL-ENG-Vol-2-(2020)/JCL-2020-Vol.2-ENG-97-110.pdf
id doaj-84879d8e73364ecd92318e4d8a70778b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-84879d8e73364ecd92318e4d8a70778b2020-11-30T13:34:18ZengConstitutional Court of GeorgiaJournal of Constitutional Law2587-53292020-11-01297110The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights BodiesAna Jabauri0Central European University, LLMDue to the ECHR’s decision regarding the request for interim measures lodged by Armenia against Azerbaijan with respect to an armed conflict, the issue of giving international humanitarian law (IHL) relevance through the jurisprudence of regional human rights bodies has recently become relevant once again. Some European scholars have criticized the Court’s attempt to get involved in the case concerning the international armed conflict, deeming the related interim measures vague, ineffective and incompatible with the role of the Court. However, while focusing on the jurisprudence of Inter-American human rights bodies, this paper will try to remind the readers that the ECHR is not the only human rights body which had to deal with IHL. It will be demonstrated that the experience of these bodies is far more creative and diverse as compared to that of the ECHR. It is not the aim of this paper to argue that decisions attempting to incorporate IHL will necessarily be complied with; nor does it intend to engage into theoretical mandate-related discussion on whether or not human rights bodies should dare dealing with IHL at all or not. Rather, it will review the jurisprudence of bodies of the Inter-American system of human rights, and suggest that, should other judicial or quasi-judicial bodies be willing to manifest the bravery of giving IHL relevance through their case-law, the IACHR and the IACtHR could be the bodies the example of which might be the one to follow. https://constcourt.ge/files/7/JCL-ENG-Vol-2-(2020)/JCL-2020-Vol.2-ENG-97-110.pdfihliachriacthrhuman rightsregional human rights bodies
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ana Jabauri
spellingShingle Ana Jabauri
The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies
Journal of Constitutional Law
ihl
iachr
iacthr
human rights
regional human rights bodies
author_facet Ana Jabauri
author_sort Ana Jabauri
title The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies
title_short The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies
title_full The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies
title_fullStr The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies
title_full_unstemmed The Art of Applying IHL: Jus In Bello in The Jurisprudence of Inter-American Human Rights Bodies
title_sort art of applying ihl: jus in bello in the jurisprudence of inter-american human rights bodies
publisher Constitutional Court of Georgia
series Journal of Constitutional Law
issn 2587-5329
publishDate 2020-11-01
description Due to the ECHR’s decision regarding the request for interim measures lodged by Armenia against Azerbaijan with respect to an armed conflict, the issue of giving international humanitarian law (IHL) relevance through the jurisprudence of regional human rights bodies has recently become relevant once again. Some European scholars have criticized the Court’s attempt to get involved in the case concerning the international armed conflict, deeming the related interim measures vague, ineffective and incompatible with the role of the Court. However, while focusing on the jurisprudence of Inter-American human rights bodies, this paper will try to remind the readers that the ECHR is not the only human rights body which had to deal with IHL. It will be demonstrated that the experience of these bodies is far more creative and diverse as compared to that of the ECHR. It is not the aim of this paper to argue that decisions attempting to incorporate IHL will necessarily be complied with; nor does it intend to engage into theoretical mandate-related discussion on whether or not human rights bodies should dare dealing with IHL at all or not. Rather, it will review the jurisprudence of bodies of the Inter-American system of human rights, and suggest that, should other judicial or quasi-judicial bodies be willing to manifest the bravery of giving IHL relevance through their case-law, the IACHR and the IACtHR could be the bodies the example of which might be the one to follow.
topic ihl
iachr
iacthr
human rights
regional human rights bodies
url https://constcourt.ge/files/7/JCL-ENG-Vol-2-(2020)/JCL-2020-Vol.2-ENG-97-110.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT anajabauri theartofapplyingihljusinbellointhejurisprudenceofinteramericanhumanrightsbodies
AT anajabauri artofapplyingihljusinbellointhejurisprudenceofinteramericanhumanrightsbodies
_version_ 1724411548846260224