Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorMurphy, Ray
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Tara
dc.date.accessioned2013-07-16T12:22:43Z
dc.date.available2015-06-08T13:41:52Z
dc.date.issued2013-05-09
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10379/3523
dc.description.abstractThis thesis examines the adequacy of the laws of armed conflict to prohibit environmental damage in non-international armed conflict. The overall conclusions is that the laws of armed conflict are not adequate in this regard because they do not apply in equal measure to state and non-state actors and they only provide piecemeal indirect environmental protection, which conforms to the requirements of the principle of legality and the rule of international law in only very specific circumstances. The thesis begins by tracing the historical development of the environmental dimension of the laws of armed conflict, to explain the absence of direct environmental protection provisions and to contextualise the discussion the subsequent chapters. It also briefly outlines the nature of the environmental damage caused by state and non-state actors in non-international armed conflict. Subsequently, the treaty-based and customary laws of armed conflict that have the potential to indirectly protect the environment in non-international armed conflict are identified and discussed. In this regard, Common Article 3, provisions of Additional Protocol II, some regulations on the methods and means of warfare, the Martens Clause, the principles of distinction, humanity, military necessity, proportionality and precautions in attack are interrogated, in addition to customary rules identified by the ICRC in their Customary Law Study.This examination of the laws of armed conflict is supplemented by analysis of the extent to which the proscriptive gaps in the laws of armed conflict can be filled by other branches of international law and mechanisms of international accountability. In particular, international human rights law, international environmental law, international criminal law, international civil compensation mechanisms and environmental ¿safe zones¿ are explored in Chapters 6 and 7. The conclusion summarises the main findings in the thesis, proves the research statement in answer to the research question, identifies limitations to the study and implications for future research.en_US
dc.subjectLaw of armed conflicten_US
dc.subjectInternational humanitarian lawen_US
dc.subjectEnvironmental protectionen_US
dc.subjectHuman rightsen_US
dc.subjectEnvironmental consequences of waren_US
dc.subjectNon-international armed conflicten_US
dc.subjectInternational criminal lawen_US
dc.subjectEnvironmental safe zonesen_US
dc.subjectUnited nations compensation commissionen_US
dc.subjectAdditional Protocol IIen_US
dc.subjectCommon Article 3en_US
dc.subjectCustomary international lawen_US
dc.subjectIrish Centre for Human Rightsen_US
dc.titleThe Prohibition of Environmental Damage during the Conduct of Hostilities in Non-International Armed Conflicten_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.funder2008-2010 Connect Doctoral Research Fellowship Awarded by NUI Galwayen_US
dc.local.noteThis thesis examines the laws that apply in conflicts that are classified as being 'non-international' in nature to determine the extent to which they prohibit environmental damage by those engaged in the conflict. This thesis concludes that the honeycomb of protection that exists is not adequate in light of the nature of present-day non-international armed conflict.en_US
dc.local.finalYesen_US
nui.item.downloads4628


Files in this item

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland
This item is available under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland. No item may be reproduced for commercial purposes. Please refer to the publisher's URL where this is made available, or to notes contained in the item itself. Other terms may apply.

The following license files are associated with this item:

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record