Self-defence against non-state actors: impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War
The legality of self-defence against non-state actors is currently one of the most contested issues of the jus contra bellum. How should we interpret state practice - has it already given rise, in law, to a broader concept of self-defence, or is the traditional state centred view still good law? Und...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | , |
| Format: | Book/Monograph Working Paper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Heidelberg
Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law
[30 Mar 2017]
|
| Series: | MPIL research paper series
no. 2017, 07 |
| In: |
MPIL research paper series (no. 2017, 07)
|
| Online Access: | Verlag, kostenfrei, Volltext: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2941640 |
| Author Notes: | Anne Peters, Christian Marxsen (eds) ; with contributions by Theodore Christakis, Olivier Corten, Irène Couzigou, Jochen A. Frowein, Letizia Lo Giacco, Leena Grover, Matthias Hartwig, Larissa van den Herik, Shin Kawagishi, Guy Keinan, Karin Oellers-Frahm, Inger Oesterdahl, Carl-Philipp Sassenrath, Britta Sjöstedt, Paulina Starski, Christian Tams, Antonello Tancredi, Priya Urs, Sir Michael Wood |
| Summary: | The legality of self-defence against non-state actors is currently one of the most contested issues of the jus contra bellum. How should we interpret state practice - has it already given rise, in law, to a broader concept of self-defence, or is the traditional state centred view still good law? Under which specific requirements should self-defence against non-state actors, if at all, be regarded as lawful and how can an abuse of an extended right to self-defence be prevented? The "Impulses from the Max Planck Trialogues on the Law of Peace and War" consist of short essays dealing with these questions |
|---|---|
| Item Description: | Gesehen am 06.09.2017 |
| Physical Description: | Online Resource |