Publicação
Conflict or Convergence? International Criminal Justice and the Interplay between International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law
| Resumo: | Interpreting international law requires navigating multiple legal frameworks, including International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and International Criminal Law. While these branches have distinct foundations and goals, they are integral components of international law, mutually reinforcing and complementing each other. An important area of overlap between International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law is the protection of the rights to life and liberty – issues that often give rise to legal controversy. The challenge lies in solving conflicts between those branches without allowing one set of norms to supersede the other, as the lex specialis principle could suggest. The International Court of Justice has invoked the lex specialis principle to explain the interaction between International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law. But this principle assumes a relation – speciality – that is difficult to apply consistently; and the functions the Court assigns to the principle are challenging to implement. This thesis proposes that, rather than prioritising one branch over the other, we adopt a complementarity approach, to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. This complementarity is exemplified by International Criminal Law, which draws on sources from both Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, as well as on fundamental principles of criminal law. Moreover, courts handling International Criminal Law have jurisdiction over jus in bello, jus ad bellum, and periods of peace, which requires them to deal with different substantive areas; and here too sources can conflict, particularly in the adjudication of crimes against humanity and war crimes, which are the most frequently adjudicated international crimes. The complementarity approach offers an answer to the question of how these different legal frameworks converge in legal practice. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | João Pedro dos Santos Quintela Soares |
| Assunto: | human rights International Humanitarian Law International Criminal Law Armed Conflicts lex specialis complementarity direitos humanos direito internacional humanitário direito penal internacional complementaridade conflitos armados |
| Ano: | 2025 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | dissertação de mestrado |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade Nova de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | inglês |
| Origem: | Repositório Institucional da UNL |
| Resumo: | Interpreting international law requires navigating multiple legal frameworks, including International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law, and International Criminal Law. While these branches have distinct foundations and goals, they are integral components of international law, mutually reinforcing and complementing each other. An important area of overlap between International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law is the protection of the rights to life and liberty – issues that often give rise to legal controversy. The challenge lies in solving conflicts between those branches without allowing one set of norms to supersede the other, as the lex specialis principle could suggest. The International Court of Justice has invoked the lex specialis principle to explain the interaction between International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law. But this principle assumes a relation – speciality – that is difficult to apply consistently; and the functions the Court assigns to the principle are challenging to implement. This thesis proposes that, rather than prioritising one branch over the other, we adopt a complementarity approach, to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. This complementarity is exemplified by International Criminal Law, which draws on sources from both Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, as well as on fundamental principles of criminal law. Moreover, courts handling International Criminal Law have jurisdiction over jus in bello, jus ad bellum, and periods of peace, which requires them to deal with different substantive areas; and here too sources can conflict, particularly in the adjudication of crimes against humanity and war crimes, which are the most frequently adjudicated international crimes. The complementarity approach offers an answer to the question of how these different legal frameworks converge in legal practice. |
|---|