Jeroen C. van den Boogaard’s research while affiliated with University of Amsterdam and other places

This book seeks to clarify the legal concept of proportionality in international humanitarian law, as it applies during armed conflict. It is argued in the book that a refocus of the interpretation of the proportionality rule is warranted to enhance the protection of civilians. More precisely, this book seeks to dissect the origins of the rule, determine how its components must be interpreted and how it is to be applied in practice. The book considers practical situations that may arise in the conduct of military operations and searches for the limits international humanitarian law sets to commanders' assessments of proportionality during armed conflict. The book concludes that proportionality is an inherently subjective and imprecise yardstick that nonetheless serves to protect civilians during armed conflict.

There is wide agreement that using chemical weapons in warfare is abhorrent and must be prohibited. Chemical weapons have nonetheless, even recently, been used. This chapter argues that chemical weapons are prohibited on the basis of both the international humanitarian law (IHL) principles pertaining to means of warfare as well as arm control law. This is evidenced in the almost universally ratified Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 (CWC 1993) and a corresponding rule of customary international law. Biological weapons are similarly prohibited, primarily as a result of their inherent indiscriminate character.KeywordsChemical Weapons ConventionChlorineOPCWGas ProtocolBiological weapons

This chapter assesses the rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) regulating the conduct of hostilities. To that end, a short description of the notion of targeting is provided, as well as an analysis of the interrelated IHL rules and principles of distinction, precautions in attack and proportionality.KeywordsConduct of hostilitiestargetingdistinctionprecautions in attackproportionality

This book is a tribute to the work of Professor Terry Gill, offered to him by friends and colleagues who are also academics and/or practitioners in the field of International Law of Military Operations (ILMO). ILMO is a distinct sub-discipline within public international law and domestic public law, covering all domains of military operations: land, sea, air and (cyber)space. As such, ILMO includes elements of other branches of public international law, such as international humanitarian law, human rights law, the law on the use of force, the law of the sea, the law of State responsibility, arms control law and the law of international organisations. Importantly, as a hybrid field of law, ILMO covers the legal basis for military deployment both nationally and internationally, as well as the subsequent international legal regimes applicable to the forces (once deployed) and the domestic administrative and constitutional issues related to the relevant forces. Control is a central notion of ILMO and is the leading theme of this book. The contributions in this book reflect the variety of legal frameworks applicable to military operations and offer an insightful view into the various legal and factual roles of control. The legal notion of control is considered, inter alia, in relation to restraints in the decision to deploy military forces and the legal basis for doing so. The impact of control is also discussed in relation to State and command responsibility and in different situations, including during peace operations, occupation and other situations of armed conflict. Additionally, control is considered over the armed forces themselves, over detainees migrants at sea and over the type or scale of force used in military operations, through targeting rules or rules of engagement. Furthermore, the book contains several discussions of control in the case law of international courts, within arms control law, weapons law and in the context of autonomous weapons systems. The editors of the book are all practitioners, academically affiliated to the Faculty of Military Sciences (War Studies) of the Netherlands Defence Academy and/or the Law Faculty of the University of Amsterdam.

There is an ongoing debate on whether and how the use of certain emerging weapon technologies perceived as decreasingly allowing human control over the use of force should be regulated or banned. The focus of the debate on such so-called autonomous weapon systems has from the outset been too narrow and misguided. The frame of ‘autonomy’ and the resulting weapon-centric focus on control, neglects that the effects of the military use of weapons may be controlled in many more ways than by restricting certain weapons or technologies. This chapter argues that the legal requirement to exercise control over the effects of the use of force, may be complied with by virtue of a range of (human) decisions preceding, during and even after employment of a particular weapon.

Many armed conflicts rage in urban areas, where it is particularly difficult for attackers to prevail over their enemy without causing extensive civilian casualties and destruction to civilian infrastructure. This chapter aims to provide a general overview of the legal obligations of the parties to armed conflicts with regard to precautions in attack, particularly in urban and siege warfare.

This chapter aims to address the practice of using a “knock on the roof” as a warning before air strikes are launched in order to mitigate civilian casualties during armed conflict. It involves the dropping of non-explosive or low-impact type of munitions on the intended target. This “knock” is reportedly accompanied by other specific warnings, such as telephone calls and text-messages, indicating that the attack on the building is imminent. The knock is intended to be used on a legitimate military objective, leaving no doubt that the attack is in fact about to happen, and urging civilians to relocate to a safer place. This chapter aims to analyse whether, and if so, under which circumstances, the knock on the roof practice may be used within the boundaries of international humanitarian law (IHL), both as a warning and as a method of warfare.

The rules of international humanitarian law of armed conflict are codified in a rather extensive body of treaty law. In addition, extensive research has been conducted into the rules of customary international humanitarian law. The author of this contribution will argue that there is another important source of positive international humanitarian law: principles of international humanitarian law. In this chapter, the role of the principles of international humanitarian law, the functions they perform and their legal significance as a source of international humanitarian law will be assessed. With general public international law as its starting point, the chapter discusses the sources of international humanitarian law. It explains the important role of the Martens Clause and provides examples of how the principles of international humanitarian law may be applied in contemporary armed conflicts.