http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 유재형 ( You Jae-hyeong ) (검색결과 1 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
현대무력충돌법(現代武力衝突法)의 규범적(規範的) 특성(特性)과 실효성(實效性)의 문제
유재형 ( You Jae-hyeong ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2009 외법논집 Vol.33 No.1
This paper is to study the normative characters and the issue of the effectiveness of the law of modern armed conflicts. The study shows the following areas. 1) The law of armed conflicts is composed of the law of belligerence and the law of neutrality. Today, under the UN system, a war is illegal. Therefore. instead of the word 'the law of war', it's called the law of armed conflicts or the international humanitarian law. And the law of armed conflicts is about two different laws which are the legality of war (jus ad bellum) and the method of war (jus in bello). Nowadays, the law about the method of war (jus in bello) has been developed and improved highly. 2) Based on the basic structural analysis, the normative characters of the law of armed conflicts are analyzed. The law of armed conflicts is based on the two conflicting elements, the military necessity and the principle of humanity. In the past, the military necessity was more important, but in modern international society, the principle of humanity has become far more important. Therefore, the Hague Law with emphasis on military necessity and the Geneva Law with the principle of humanity are becoming united. And we can see that many of these normative laws have become customized. Especially, this unification phenomenon is very clear in the 1977's 1st Geneva additional protocol to the Geneva Conventions. As a result, the prohibitive elements of the war reprisal have become a lot more widened. This is the way of securing the execution of the law of armed conflicts, and takes away the right to the war reprisal which has been permitted to the belligerent countries until now. Related to the problem of securing the effectiveness of the law of armed conflicts, it suggests a very important issue. 3) Here, in this third area of the study, securing the binding force of the law of armed conflicts, Wirksamkeit and war reprisal as argument points are analyzed. First of all, the problem of Wirksamkeit can not be acknowledged. Like what J. Westlake said, the laws of war are the product of the compromise between military necessity and humanitarian principle. Here, the military necessity is already considered, so the meaning of making the law of armed conflicts vanishes if the rules of war are abandoned by the military necessity. Merely, the military necessity should be recognized only in case of confirming it as the international customary laws and of permitting it as the treaties. In this way, Wirksamkeit could be separated the classical(or broad) one from the modern(or narrow) one which means the military necessity; accordingly, in modern case, the latter should be accepted. And concerning the military necessity, some scholars insist that the anticipatory self-defence should be admitted, but it is not easy to permit this when the abuse of the right of self-defence is considered, even in the interpretation of the UN Charter. On the other hand, for the problem of the war reprisal, there's a tremendous conflict between pros and cons. However, in reality, as the system of the compulsory enforcement of the international law is weak, the war reprisal must be permitted only when it has the appropriate conditions. Therefore, in conclusion, to increase the effectiveness of the law of armed conflicts, the content of deeds norms should be broadened for belligerent countries as well as the process of securing the execution should be improved. And the constituents of the international society, individuals as well as countries, need a firm will to abide by the law of armed conflicts.
KCI
KISS연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
