Accountability of Armed Opposition Groups in International Law
Cambridge University Press, Jul 25, 2002
Who is accountable under international law for the acts committed by armed opposition groups? In today's world the majority of political conflicts involve non-state actors attempting to exert political influence (such as overthrowing a government or bringing about secession). Notwithstanding their impact on the course of events, however, we often know little about these groups, and even less about how to treat their actions legally. In this award-winning scholarship, Liesbeth Zegveld examines the need to legally identify the parties involved when internal conflicts arise, and the reality of their demands for rights. Her study draws upon international humanitarian law, human rights law and international criminal law to consider a fundamental question: who is accountable for the acts committed by non-state actors, or for the failure to prevent or repress these acts? This study will be of interest to academics, postgraduate students and professionals involved with armed conflict and international relations.
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
accountability of armed acts of armed Afghanistan Aleksovski amnesty apply to armed Arbitrary Executions armed groups armed opposition groups attacks Celebici Chapter civilian population command responsibility Commission on Human Commission’s Common Article criminal responsibility customary law Draft Articles El Salvador emphasis added FMLN Fourth Geneva Convention Geneva Conventions genocide hereafter hostilities human rights law human rights treaties Ibid individual Inter-American Commission internal armed conflict internal conflicts international bodies International Covenant International Criminal Court international humanitarian law international law international practice leaders of armed members of armed military norms paras parties persons principle prohibition prosecute Protocol II provides punish Rapporteur on Extrajudicial relevant Report of ONUSAL Report on Colombia Rome Statute rules Rwanda Tribunal Salvador Secretary-General Security Council Sierra Leone sition groups Situation of Human Somalia Special Rapporteur state’s Summary or Arbitrary superior responsibility Tadi´c Interlocutory Appeal Third Report tion UN Security Council Yugoslavia and Rwanda Yugoslavia Tribunal