{ "item_title" : "How Consistent are Interpretations of the Principle of Proportionality in Situations of Asymmetric Conflicts?", "item_author" : [" Anna Scheithauer "], "item_description" : "Master's Thesis from the year 2015 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Peace and Conflict Studies, Security, grade: 69 (Merit) - UK System, University College London (School of Public Policy), course: Human Rights, language: English, abstract: In this paper I present a holistic approach to identify how consistent interpretations of jus in bello proportionality regarding precision strikes in the context of counterinsurgency operations are by examining both consistency in substance and process. I hypothesize that there is high inconsistency in proportionality balancing, and will illustrate that it is both a theoretical and practical problem by using a mixed-methods design of empirical and theoretical analysis. Doing so, I will move beyond a positivist reading of the law to present my argument though a normative framework. I will argue that to fully comprehend this inconsistency one needs to understand the normative relationship between IHL and IHRL. Structurally, I begin the thesis with an empirical analysis of case law and of the counterinsurgency policy of the US to demonstrate (in)consistency by rethinking it in four specific categories: scope, content, time, certainty. The purpose of this section is to evidence variance in interpretations of the proportionality variables and of the balancing act in ex-post (jurisprudence) and ex-ante (policy) assessments. Secondly, I will engage in a purposive analysis of the legal framework presenting theoretical approaches on the relationship of IHL with IHRL. This is to dismiss inconsistency in proportionality balancing as a ROL problem by showing that there is a higher (normative) purpose behind it. In the final chapter, I will apply the theoretical findings to the empirical discoveries to demonstrate that inconsistency is due to a proportionality continuum. This section will illustrate that inconsistency is not inherently bad as long as it serves the protective purpose intrinsic to both IHL and IHRL,", "item_img_path" : "https://covers1.booksamillion.com/covers/bam/3/66/837/760/366837760X_b.jpg", "price_data" : { "retail_price" : "59.50", "online_price" : "59.50", "our_price" : "59.50", "club_price" : "59.50", "savings_pct" : "0", "savings_amt" : "0.00", "club_savings_pct" : "0", "club_savings_amt" : "0.00", "discount_pct" : "10", "store_price" : "" } }

Overview

Customers Also Bought

Details