Abstract

This article examines the law of occupation by proxy which was identified by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Tadić case. In particular, this article reviews the necessary nature of occupation by proxy, the case law development of the concept and then its substantive content. The article next uses Eastern Ukraine as a practical example of a possible occupation by proxy situation. Lastly, the effectiveness of the concept is analysed to see if it could be applied in a conflict today and how the concept could be development and brought to the forefront of international humanitarian law.

Highlights

  • The well-being of an individual is the ultimate object of all law.[1]

  • The law of occupation only applies in international armed conflict (IAC) but the relatively new concept of internationalised non-international armed conflict (NIAC) creates the possibility for occupation by proxy to be further recognised

  • It is clear that the Donetsk People’s Republic (DNR) and Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) have made progress in independently administering the territories putting them in the position to ensure public order and safety

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The well-being of an individual is the ultimate object of all law.[1]. Sir Hersch Lauterpacht QC. The application of the law of belligerent occupation under international humanitarian law (IHL) has been defined narrowly which significantly hampers its effectiveness in conflicts. It has evolved over the last 140 years showing the capacity for this body of law to adapt to new challenges. Of occupation and current treaty law is inadequate and the non-recognition of occupations by proxy creates a gap in protection for civilians States may deny their obligations as Occupying Powers because the international community is largely unwilling to recognise a law of occupation by proxy or an overall or effective control relationship with a third party cannot be established. Section three’s factual evaluation of the applicability of the law of occupation is significantly impeded and rests on open source information from news media and UN institutions

A law of occupation by proxy?
Why is the legal regulation of occupation by proxy necessary?
Case law development
Internationalisation of the conflict and overall control
Effective control of territory: actual or potential?
Falling into the hands of the enemy
Conclusion
15. Central Front
Case study – Eastern Ukraine
Brief background
Extent of Russian control over the forces in Eastern Ukraine
Control of territory by the DNR and LNR
Can occupation by proxy be effectively implemented?
What level of obligations are applicable?
The Security Council’s role
Legitimacy and international community impetus
State responsibility
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.