The Role of Analogy in Codification and Progressive Development of Humanity Scopes of International Law:  IHL & Human rights Law

Piri, Heidar

The Role of Analogy in Codification and Progressive Development of Humanity Scopes of International Law: IHL & Human rights Law

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Heidar Piri

Assistant Professor of Public International Law, Law Department, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran

Abstract

In identifying the functions of analogy in international law, the role of analogy is often neglected in the process of law-making, codification and progressive development of international law. It is due to the historical origin of analogy in the process of decision-making in international tribunals. However, this practical aspect of analogy is one of the potentially important aspects in which analogy has been played an important role in the work of the International Law Commission, both as a general method of legal reasoning and as a gap filler. This paper provides an analytical framework to develop a comprehensive understanding of legal analogy in humanity scopes of international law.

The author is of the opinion that, in spite of significant limitations on the application of analogy in these areas and by considering the dynamics of international tribunal decisions and the absence of human rights law and IHL rules indicate that states, the international community, and other international institutions have a real need for analogy as one of the most important forms of legal reasoning. The emergence of analogy from the necessitatis in these fields shows that analogies have an accomplishment for achieving not only a coherent and up-to-date legal system but also for making the international legal system more efficient. The use of legal analogies by maintaining and observing the lege lata of international law can make the legal rules compatible with the current needs of the international community.

Keywords

Legal Analogy

ILC

Internal Displacement

Disaster Relief

Armed Conflict

پیری، حیدر(1402). بررسی تحلیلی خلأ حقوقی در نظام حقوقی ایران و حقوق بینالملل با تأکید بر سازکارهای رفع آن، مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، 14(2)، 655-677.

پیری، حیدر؛ قاری سیدفاطمی، سید محمد؛ محمودی، سیدهادی(1400). کاربست استدلال قیاسی در نظام حقوق بینالملل کیفری؛ نبایدها، بایدها و شایدها، پژوهش حقوق کیفری، 9(35)، 169-139.

زرشکی، محمد(1402). حقوق اسیران جنگی در رویکرد پیامبر اکرم (ص)؛ از نظر عمل با تأکید بر موازین حقوق بشردوستانه در اسلام، مطالعات حقوق بشراسلامی، 12(28)، 109-131.

زکوی، مهدی؛ پرتوی، علی(1401). بررسی جایگاه نهادهای بینالمللی در جهانشمولی حقوق بشر، مطالعات حقوق بشراسلامی، 11(25)، 7-28.

صادقمنش، جعفر؛ فرخینیا، علی(1391). مبنا، روش و جایگاه استدلال قیاسی، حقوقی دادگستری، 76(79)، 213-238.

قاری سیدفاطمی، سیدمحمد؛ پیری، حیدر؛ محمودی، سیدهادی(1398). کشف قاعدة حقوقی از طریق قیاس توسط دیوان بینالمللی دادگستری، مطالعات حقوق عمومی، 49(4)، 1149-1170.

کریمیپرویز، محمد؛ شیرخانی، علی؛ محسنیمشتقین، علی(1401). بررسی تطبیقی حقوق بشر در آموزههای محافظهکاری و سنت گرایی، مطالعات حقوق بشراسلامی، 11(25)، 51-74.

محبی، علی(1399). حقوق اسرای جنگی در پرتو حقوق بشردوستانه، مطالعات حقوق بشر اسلامی، 9(19)، 1-20.

ممتاز، جمشید؛ رنجبریان، امیرحسین(1387). حقوق بینالملل بشردوستانه مخاصمات مسلحانه داخلی، تهران: نشر میزان.

نمامیان، پیمان؛ شکربیگی، علیرضا(1402). ظرفیتسنجی قلمرو اسناد حقوق بشر در قبال جرایم تروریستی، مطالعات حقوق بشر اسلامی، 12(29)، 87-108.

Annotations to the Draft Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance, 26 October 2007.

Bothe,(2002), ‘War Crimes’, in A. Cassese, P. Gaeta, and J.R.W.D. Jones (eds), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary.

Coenca Bros. v. Germany, Decisions of the Mixed Greco-German Arbitral Tribunal, Between Greece and the Federal Republic of Germany, 1927.

Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984.

Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons which may be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate Effects, concluded at Geneva on October 10, 1980, entered into force in December 1983.

Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951.

Decision of the British Claims in the Spanish Zone of Morocco Case, Great Britain v. Spain, RIAA (1924).

Deng, Francis, (2008), “Preface to the First Edition”, In Walter Kälin, Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement Annotations, ASIL.

Fenrick, (2004), ‘The Prosecution of Unlawful Attack Cases before the ICTY’, Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Vol.7.

Fisher, (2007), ‘Domestic Regulation of International Humanitarian Relief in Disasters and Armed Conflict: A Comparative Analysis’, Vol.89, IRRC.

Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War (Third Geneva Convention) August 1949.

Greenwood, C, (1996), “International Humanitarian Law and the Tadic Case”, EJIL, Vol., p.281.

Guidelines of the International Federation of Red. Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), 2012, Principle.3.

Hafnet, Eg G., (2001), Is the Topic of Responsibility of International Organization Ripe for Codification? Some Critical Remarks in U. Fastenrath and Others (eds), From Bilateralism to Community Interest: Essays in Honour of Bruno Simma, Oxford.

Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, 1954.

Hague Convention IX on Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War, 1907.

Hague Regulations on Land Warfare, 1907.

ICTY, Prosecutor v. Tadic´, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, Case No. IT-94-1-AR72, A. Ch., 2 October 1995.

IFRC Prepared a Model Act for the Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance, 2013.

ILC Commentary, Report on the work of the sixty-sixth session, 2014.

ILC, Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters, 2016.

ILC, Third report on the protection of persons in the event of disasters (by Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Special Rapporteur), sixty-second session, Geneva, 2010.

Institute of International Law, Resolution on Humanitarian Assistance 2003.

J.-M. Henckaerts; L. Doswald-Beck, (2004), Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol.2.

Kiriadolou v. Germany, Decisions of the Mixed Greco-German Arbitral Tribunal, Between Greece and the Federal Republic of Germany, 1930.

Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) [1986] ICJ Rep.

Prosecutor v. Halilovic´, Judgment, IT-01-48-T, 16 Nov. 2005.

Protocol II Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, 1977.

Report of the International Law Commission on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters: Sixty-eighth Session, A/71/10 (2016).

Sivakumaran S., (2012), The Law of Non-International Armed Conflict, Oxford.

Sivakumaran, Sandesh, (2011), Reenvisaging the International Law of Internal Armed Conflict, EJIL, Vol.22, No.1.

Sivakumaran, Sandesh, (2017), Techniques in International Law-Making: Extrapolation, Analogy, Form and the Emergence of an International Law of Disaster Relief, EJIL, Vol.28 (4).

South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Second Phase, Judgment of 18 July 1966, (Dissenting Opinion of Judge Jessup).

Von Hebel, H.; Robinson, D., (1999), “Crimes within the Jurisdiction of the Court”, In The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute, Issues, Negotiations, Results, Lee Roy S., (ed.), Kluwer Law International.
1. Sandoz, C. Swinarski; B. Zimmerman (eds), (1987), Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.