Assignments week 3 uitwerkingen
Part A: True/False Questions
1. In the Nicaragua case, the ICJ held that states are allowed to use
force in response to a wrongful use of force.
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether indeed states
are allowed to use force in response to a wrongful use of force according
to the Nicaragua case.
As regards the applicable law two sources are relevant, namely customary
international law art. Art. 2§4 UN Charter. Art. 2§4 UN Charter states that
the use of force is prohibited. However, this article that reflects customary
international law doesn’t prohibit the use of force for self-defence. Self-
defence is regulated in Chapter VII UN Charter. The Nicaragua-case states
that only the most grave forms qualify for the use of force. And not a
wrongful use of force. (i.e. just intervene between parties or enter a
state’s territory without consent).
This statement is false because it incorrectly states that states are allowed
to use force in response to a wrongful use of force according to the
Nicaragua-case.
2. On 17 March 2011, The UNSC adopted Resolution 1973 which
provided: ‘The Security Council,
(…)
Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty,
independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan
Arab Jamahiriya,
Determining that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
continues a threat to international peace and security,
Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
(…)
4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-
General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or
arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General,
to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of
resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated
areas under threat of attach in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (…).
S/RES/1973 authorizes member states to use force against Libya.
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether S/RES/1973
under Chapter VII authorizes member states to use force against Libya. As
regards the applicable law two sources are relevant, namely the UN-
Charter and S/RES/1973.
Customary international law is not relevant because this questions deals
with the powers of the UNSC as states in S/RES/1973.
, Chapter V UN-Charter is relevant because art. 24 states that the UNSC is
authorized. Chapter VII opens the possibility of the UNSC to make permit
the use of force under art. 51 or 39 in conjunction with art. 42 UN Charter.
S/RES/1973 authorizes member states to use all necessary means to
protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack, this is
equal to the use of force.
This statement is true because it correctly states that S/RES/1973 under
Chapter VII authorizes member states to use force against Libya.
3. Under the law of armed conflict, in particular Article 51 AP I, civilians
and civilian object enjoy general protection against dangers arising
from military operations. This means that the law of armed conflict
prohibits any loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian
objects or a combination thereof.
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether the law of
armed conflict prohibits any loss of civilian life, injury of civilians, damage
to civilian objects or a combination thereof. As regards the applicable law
two sources are relevant, namely art. 48, art. 51 and art. 57 of the
Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention and customary
international law which is reflected by this.
Art. 48 states that we have to distinguish in the law of armed between
civilians and combatants whereby the protection of the civilian population
and individual civilians important according to art. 51.
Art. 57 states that in the conduct of military operations, constant care
shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian
objects; this should be necessary and proportional. Thus, attacks against
combatants are fine as they are part of the law of armed conflict and they
should protect the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects and this
can’t rule out the loss of civilian life, injury of civilians, damage to civilian
objects of a combination thereof.
This statement is false because it incorrectly states that the law of armed
conflict prohibits any loss of civilian life, injury of civilians, damage to
civilian objects of a combination thereof.
4. According to the ICJ in the Wall advisory opinion, the conduct of
belligerents in times of armed conflict is not only regulated by
international humanitarian law but also by international human
rights law
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether the conduct of
belligerent in times of armed conflict is not only regulated by international
humanitarian law but also by international human rights law according to
the ICJ in the Wall Advisory Opinion.
Part A: True/False Questions
1. In the Nicaragua case, the ICJ held that states are allowed to use
force in response to a wrongful use of force.
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether indeed states
are allowed to use force in response to a wrongful use of force according
to the Nicaragua case.
As regards the applicable law two sources are relevant, namely customary
international law art. Art. 2§4 UN Charter. Art. 2§4 UN Charter states that
the use of force is prohibited. However, this article that reflects customary
international law doesn’t prohibit the use of force for self-defence. Self-
defence is regulated in Chapter VII UN Charter. The Nicaragua-case states
that only the most grave forms qualify for the use of force. And not a
wrongful use of force. (i.e. just intervene between parties or enter a
state’s territory without consent).
This statement is false because it incorrectly states that states are allowed
to use force in response to a wrongful use of force according to the
Nicaragua-case.
2. On 17 March 2011, The UNSC adopted Resolution 1973 which
provided: ‘The Security Council,
(…)
Reaffirming its strong commitment to the sovereignty,
independence, territorial integrity and national unity of the Libyan
Arab Jamahiriya,
Determining that the situation in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
continues a threat to international peace and security,
Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
(…)
4. Authorizes Member States that have notified the Secretary-
General, acting nationally or through regional organizations or
arrangements, and acting in cooperation with the Secretary-General,
to take all necessary measures, notwithstanding paragraph 9 of
resolution 1970 (2011), to protect civilians and civilian populated
areas under threat of attach in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (…).
S/RES/1973 authorizes member states to use force against Libya.
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether S/RES/1973
under Chapter VII authorizes member states to use force against Libya. As
regards the applicable law two sources are relevant, namely the UN-
Charter and S/RES/1973.
Customary international law is not relevant because this questions deals
with the powers of the UNSC as states in S/RES/1973.
, Chapter V UN-Charter is relevant because art. 24 states that the UNSC is
authorized. Chapter VII opens the possibility of the UNSC to make permit
the use of force under art. 51 or 39 in conjunction with art. 42 UN Charter.
S/RES/1973 authorizes member states to use all necessary means to
protect civilians and civilian populated areas under threat of attack, this is
equal to the use of force.
This statement is true because it correctly states that S/RES/1973 under
Chapter VII authorizes member states to use force against Libya.
3. Under the law of armed conflict, in particular Article 51 AP I, civilians
and civilian object enjoy general protection against dangers arising
from military operations. This means that the law of armed conflict
prohibits any loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian
objects or a combination thereof.
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether the law of
armed conflict prohibits any loss of civilian life, injury of civilians, damage
to civilian objects or a combination thereof. As regards the applicable law
two sources are relevant, namely art. 48, art. 51 and art. 57 of the
Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Convention and customary
international law which is reflected by this.
Art. 48 states that we have to distinguish in the law of armed between
civilians and combatants whereby the protection of the civilian population
and individual civilians important according to art. 51.
Art. 57 states that in the conduct of military operations, constant care
shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian
objects; this should be necessary and proportional. Thus, attacks against
combatants are fine as they are part of the law of armed conflict and they
should protect the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects and this
can’t rule out the loss of civilian life, injury of civilians, damage to civilian
objects of a combination thereof.
This statement is false because it incorrectly states that the law of armed
conflict prohibits any loss of civilian life, injury of civilians, damage to
civilian objects of a combination thereof.
4. According to the ICJ in the Wall advisory opinion, the conduct of
belligerents in times of armed conflict is not only regulated by
international humanitarian law but also by international human
rights law
The core legal question that is being addressed is whether the conduct of
belligerent in times of armed conflict is not only regulated by international
humanitarian law but also by international human rights law according to
the ICJ in the Wall Advisory Opinion.
