This chapter explores how international humanitarian law (IHL) can prohibit morally arbitrary killing in armed conflict and thereby avoid substantive conflict with international human rights law (IHRL). The chapter distinguishes between different senses of moral permissibility (fact-relative, evidence-relative, and belief-relative; objective and subjective; direct and indirect) and shows how different IHL norms can be interpreted to guarantee that lawful killings are morally permissible in one or more of these senses. Finally, the chapter contests the view of Janina Dill and Henry Shue that IHL should seek not to prohibit human rights violations but rather to minimize human rights violations. Instead, IHL should aim to help combatants better conform to their moral obligations.
Thursday, May 21, 2015
Haque: Laws for War
Adil Ahmad Haque (Rutgers Univ., Newark - Law) has posted Laws for War (in Theoretical Boundaries of Armed Conflict & Human Rights, Jens David Ohlin ed., forthcoming). Here's the abstract: