Copias sin limite
Enhancing the Implementation of the State’s Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings In the Case- Law of the European Court of Human Rights and American Court of Human Rights
The starting point of this paper is based on a basic assumption and on two observations: the basic assumption is that public international law, since the World War II (WWII), has developed several mechanisms to limit killings in general, including most recently targeted killings by drones. […]
I. Introduction.
II. THE PHENOMENON OF TAR GETED KILLINGS IN ITS HISTORICA L DIMENSION.
III. THE PHENOMENON OF TAR GETED KILLINGS IN ITS LEGAL AND SOCIAL DIMENSIONS.
IV. THE INTERNATIONA L LEGAL STANDARDS ON THE INVESTIGATION OF TAR GETED KILLINGS.
V. The Two Major Human Rights Systems of Adjudication.
1. The ECHR System of Human Rights Protection.
A. Right under the ECHR Convention.
B. The Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings in the Case-Law of the ECtHR.
2. The ACHR System of Human Rights Protection.
A. Rights Under the ACHR.
B. The State’s Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings in the Case-Law of the ACtHR.
VI. THE EUROPEAN AND INTER AMERICAN COURTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS SHOULD USE THE UNITED NATIONS PRINCIPLES AND THE PROTOCO L OF MINNESOTA FOR ASSESSING COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE ’S OBLIGATION TO INVESTIGATE TAR GETED KILLINGS.
1. The European and Inter-American Courts Fail to Provide That the State’s Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings is Not Necessarily Triggered by a Formal Complaint to the Police.
2. The European and Inter-American Courts’ Approach Fail to Provide Practical Guidance on How Crime Scene and Forensic Investigations Should Be Conducted in Cases of Potentially Unlawful Deaths.
VII. FURTHER CONCLUDING RECOMMENDATIONS: THE ECtHR SHOULD CHANGE ITS ATTITUDE TO WARDS THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN TAR GETED KILLING CASES
- Formato: PDF
- Tamaño: 168 Kb.
The starting point of this paper is based on a basic assumption and on two observations: the basic assumption is that public international law, since the World War II (WWII), has developed several mechanisms to limit killings in general, including most recently targeted killings by drones. […]
I. Introduction.
II. THE PHENOMENON OF TAR GETED KILLINGS IN ITS HISTORICA L DIMENSION.
III. THE PHENOMENON OF TAR GETED KILLINGS IN ITS LEGAL AND SOCIAL DIMENSIONS.
IV. THE INTERNATIONA L LEGAL STANDARDS ON THE INVESTIGATION OF TAR GETED KILLINGS.
V. The Two Major Human Rights Systems of Adjudication.
1. The ECHR System of Human Rights Protection.
A. Right under the ECHR Convention.
B. The Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings in the Case-Law of the ECtHR.
2. The ACHR System of Human Rights Protection.
A. Rights Under the ACHR.
B. The State’s Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings in the Case-Law of the ACtHR.
VI. THE EUROPEAN AND INTER AMERICAN COURTS OF HUMAN RIGHTS SHOULD USE THE UNITED NATIONS PRINCIPLES AND THE PROTOCO L OF MINNESOTA FOR ASSESSING COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE ’S OBLIGATION TO INVESTIGATE TAR GETED KILLINGS.
1. The European and Inter-American Courts Fail to Provide That the State’s Duty to Investigate Targeted Killings is Not Necessarily Triggered by a Formal Complaint to the Police.
2. The European and Inter-American Courts’ Approach Fail to Provide Practical Guidance on How Crime Scene and Forensic Investigations Should Be Conducted in Cases of Potentially Unlawful Deaths.
VII. FURTHER CONCLUDING RECOMMENDATIONS: THE ECtHR SHOULD CHANGE ITS ATTITUDE TO WARDS THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN TAR GETED KILLING CASES
¿Dudas o problemas de acceso?