Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (1980) / Journal articles

Journal articles on the topic 'Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (1980)'

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (1980).

Author: Grafiati

Published: 25 July 2024

Last updated: 31 July 2024

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 20 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (1980).'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Kalshoven, Frits. "The Conventional Weapons Convention: Underlying Legal Principles." International Review of the Red Cross 30, no. 279 (December 1990): 510–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400200065.

Full text

Abstract:

Neither the 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, adopted in Geneva on 10 October 1980, nor the Protocols annexed to it specify in their operative parts the principles on which the prohibitions and restrictions rest. Such principles are, however, found in the preamble to the Convention.Four of the twelve preambular paragraphs are relevant here. They list: the “general principle of the protection of the civilian population against the effects of hostilities”; the principle “that the right of the parties to an armed conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited”; the ban on “the employment in armed conflicts of weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering”; and the fact that it is prohibited “to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, longterm and severe damage to the natural environment.” The fifth paragraph reiterates the well-known Martens clause, in the formulation accepted for Article 1, paragraph 2, of Additional Protocol I of 1977.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Leich, Marian Nash. "Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law." American Journal of International Law 91, no. 2 (April 1997): 325–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2954214.

Full text

Abstract:

On January 7, 1997, President William J. Clinton transmitted to the Senate for advice and consent to ratification the following Protocols to the 1980 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: (A) the amended Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-traps and Other Devices, adopted at Geneva on May 3, 1996 (Protocol II, or amended Mines Protocol); (B) the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons, adopted at Geneva on October 10, 1980 (Protocol III, or the Incendiary Weapons Protocol) ; and (C) the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, adopted at Geneva on May 3, 1996 (Protocol IV).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Fenrick, W. J. "The Conventional Weapons Convention: A modest but useful treaty." International Review of the Red Cross 30, no. 279 (December 1990): 498–509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400200053.

Full text

Abstract:

The author commenced an earlier study of the 1980 United Nations Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (Conventional Weapons Convention) by quoting the late Sir Hersch Lauterpacht's remark: “If international law is, in some ways, the vanishing point of law, the law of war is, perhaps even more conspicuously, at the vanishing point of international law”. He then carried Lauterpacht's statement one stage further to suggest that the vanishing point of the law of war was most likely to be found in the body of law restricting the use of weapons. Shortly after writing these words, the author discovered that a colleague had also used the remarks of Sir Hersch and asserted that the vanishing point of the law of war was the law of air warfare. More recently, the author read a paper by a younger colleague in which Sir Hersch was quoted once again, but this time it was asserted that the vanishing point of the law of war was to be found in the body of law regulating nuclear weapons. The two lessons one might derive from this brief tale are that serious students of the law of war rarely have grandiose expectations for their discipline and that a good quotation is always reusable.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

The Review. "The Issues — The ICRC's position." International Review of the Red Cross 35, no. 307 (August 1995): 363–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400072909.

Full text

Abstract:

The Review Conference of the 1980 United Nations 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 will be held in Vienna from 25 September to 13 October 1995.This Conference offers a unique opportunity for a thorough analysis of the problems caused by the use of certain weapons, with landmines heading the list. It should also specify measures to be taken to prevent the manufacture and use of new weapons from creating serious problems in future.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Prokosch, Eric. "The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems — Bringing the dumdum ban (1899) up to date." International Review of the Red Cross 35, no. 307 (August 1995): 411–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400072946.

Full text

Abstract:

In August 1994, at the third session of the group of governmental experts to prepare the 1995 Review Conference of the 1980 United Nations 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, Switzerland introduced a proposal for a new protocol to the Convention. The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems would prohibit the use of small-calibre arms and ammunition which, at ranges of 25 metres or more, transfer more than 20 Joules of energy per centimetre to the human tissues during the first 15 centimetres of passage in the body.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Plattner, Denise. "The 1980 Convention on Conventional Weapons and the applicability of rules governing means of combat in a non-international armed conflict." International Review of the Red Cross 30, no. 279 (December 1990): 551–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400200090.

Full text

Abstract:

Having reached the tenth anniversary of the 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, adopted on 10 October 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the 1980 Convention), we can measure the progress brought about by the treaty within the limits which the law sets for the suffering caused by war. Paradoxically, however, we are witnessing an increasing number of situations which, in form at least, fall outside the scope of application of the 1980 Convention, namely non-international armed conflicts.Yet international humanitarian law on methods and means of combat includes general rules applicable to all armed conflict, and hence to non-international armed conflicts too. The provisions of the 1980 Convention are an application of those general rules to the means of combat which the treaty is intended to regulate. The question thus arises whether some of the rules of conduct laid down in the 1980 Convention are applicable to all armed conflicts, whether international or non-international. In the present study, we shall attempt to reply at least to some extent to that question.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Prokosch, Eric. "Arguments for restricting cluster weapons: Humanitarian protection versus “military necessity”." International Review of the Red Cross 34, no. 299 (April 1994): 183–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400078347.

Full text

Abstract:

Concerned about the terrible toll of land-mine injuries around the world, six organizations issued a call in October 1992 for an international ban on the use, production, stockpiling and transfer of antipersonnel mines. Other organizations have taken up the call, and the campaign is already having a big impact. One result of the pressure will be the convening, pursuant to a request by France, of a review conference on the 1980 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. This renewed interest in controlling indiscriminate and excessively injurious weapons should not be confined to mines but should extend to other classes of modern antipersonnel weapons as well.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Gasser, Hans-Peter. "Universal acceptance of international humanitarian law — Promotional activities of the ICRC." International Review of the Red Cross 34, no. 302 (October 1994): 450–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400078451.

Full text

Abstract:

In its Final Declaration of 1 September 1993, the International Conference for the Protection of War Victims inter alia urged all States to make every effort to:“Consider or reconsider, in order to enhance the universal character of international humanitarian law, becoming party or confirming their succession, where appropriate, to the relevant treaties concluded since the adoption of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, in particular:—the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts of 8 June 1977 (Protocol I);—the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts of 8 June 1977 (Protocol II);—the 1980 Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons and its three Protocols;—The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict”.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Korzhenyak, Anastasia Mikhailovna. "On the prohibited methods and means of conducting warfare in the context of modern International humanitarian law and law of international security." Международное право, no. 4 (April 2021): 53–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2644-5514.2021.4.36572.

Full text

Abstract:

This article analyzes the historical-legal peculiarities of establishment and evolution of international humanitarian law and its principles in the context of the general theory of international law and current political situation. Referring to the international legal documents that regulate the rules of conducting warfare and issues of international security, as well as case law, the author describes and systematizes the methods and means of conducting warfare that are classified under restraining and prohibitive regimes. The goal of this research lies in the analysis and systematization of international legal norms aimed at prevention of the use of prohibited methods and means of conducting warfare. The object of this article is the relations between the actors of international law with regards to restrained use of means and method of conducting warfare. The subject is the international conventions, international customs, general principles of law recognized by the civilized nations. The scientific novelty consists in the author’s view of the essence of relevant issues in the sphere of international humanitarian law, establishment and evolution of international humanitarian law in the context of restrained use of methods and means of conducting warfare. The author presents the original systematization and classification of the prohibited methods and means of conducting warfare. The conclusion is made that many disagreements can be solved by responsible compliance with the existing norms of the international humanitarian law that is intended to prevent potential humanitarian risks. The author reveals that the four protocols to one of the fundamental sources of the international humanitarian law – the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (1980) have such significant shortcoming as the absence of control mechanism for compliance with the established prohibitions.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Mero, Theodor. "The Martens Clause, Principles of Humanity, and Dictates of Public Conscience." American Journal of International Law 94, no. 1 (January 2000): 78–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2555232.

Full text

Abstract:

Together with the principle prohibiting weapons “of a nature to cause superfluous injury” or “calculated to cause unnecessary suffering,” the Martens clause, in the Preamble to the Hague Conventions on the Laws and Customs of War on Land, is an enduring legacy of those instruments. In the years since its formulation, the Martens clause has been relied upon in die Nurembergjurisprudence, addressed by the International Court of Justice and human rights bodies, and reiterated in many humanitarian law treaties that regulate the means and methods of warfare. It was restated in die 1949 Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, the 1977 Additional Protocols to those Conventions, and the Preamble to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons, albeit in slightly different versions. The Martens clause was paraphrased in Resolution XXIII of the Tehran Conference on Human Rights of 1968, and is cited or otherwise referred to in several national military manuals, including those of the United States, die United Kingdom, and Germany. Moreover, attempts have recently been made, including by parties before die International Court of Jusdce, to invoke the clause, in the absence of specific norms of customary and conventional law, to oudaw the use of nuclear weapons.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Herby, Peter. "Third Session of the Review Conference of States Parties to the 1980 United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW)." International Review of the Red Cross 36, no. 312 (May 1996): 361–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s002086040009001x.

Full text

Abstract:

After two years of tortuous negotiations and despite support for a total ban on anti-personnel mines by nearly half of the 51 States participating in the final session of the Review Conference of the 1980 United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), held in Geneva from 22 April to 3 May 1996, only minimal restrictions on the use of antipersonnel landmines were finally adopted. Nine years after entry into force of amended Protocol II, anti-personnel mines will have to be detectable and those scattered outside of marked minefields, by air, artillery or other means, will have to self-destruct after 30 days. However, long-lived mines will remain available for production, export and use — including indiscriminate use. Regrettably, this modest legal response to a major international humanitarian crisis, though adopted by consensus, is unlikely to significantly reduce the horrendous level of mine casualties.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

"Clinton Renews Initiative on Global Ban of Anti-Personnel Landmines." Foreign Policy Bulletin 8, no. 2 (April 1997): 54–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1052703600001404.

Full text

Abstract:

I transmit herewith, for the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, the following Protocols to the 1980 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: the amended Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices (Protocol II or the amended Mines Protocol); the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III or the Incendiary Weapons Protocol); and the Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV). Also transmitted for the information of the Senate is the report of the Department of State with respect to these Protocols, together with article-by-article analyses.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

"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 — Statement by the ICRC." International Review of the Red Cross 34, no. 298 (February 1994): 56–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400081730.

Full text

Abstract:

We are grateful to the Government of France for having called for a conference to review the 1980 United Nations 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.The Review Conference for the 1980 Convention is an important event, as it provides the opportunity, for the first time since that Convention entered into force in 1983, for States to make an assessment of its impact and to decide whether it needs to be amended in order to be more effective.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

"ICRC statement to mark the tenth anniversary of the 1980 Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons." International Review of the Red Cross 30, no. 279 (December 1990): 586–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400200144.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

"States Party to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (10 October 1980) and States party to Protocol I of 8 June 1977 additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949." International Review of the Red Cross 30, no. 279 (December 1990): 578–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400200119.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

"Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross for the Review Conference of the 1980 United Nations 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: International Committee of the Red Cross February 1994." International Review of the Red Cross 34, no. 299 (April 1994): 123–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400078311.

Full text

Abstract:

The International Committee of the Red Cross has first-hand experience of the real consequences of the many armed conflicts now taking place and of the actual use and effects of weapons. It therefore has a particular interest in ensuring that the law takes into account the realities of the use of weapons in order to effectively reduce the amount of suffering caused in armed conflicts.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

"Towards a global ban on anti-personnel landmines: Declaration of the International Strategy Conference, Ottawa, 3–5 October 1996." International Review of the Red Cross 36, no. 315 (December 1996): 647–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020860400076476.

Full text

Abstract:

Following consultations with relevant international agencies, international organizations and non-governmental organizations, the States represented at the Ottawa Conference, the ‘Ottawa Group’, have agreed to enhance cooperation and coordination of efforts on the basis of the following concerns and goals with respect to anti-personnel mines:1. a recognition that the extreme humanitarian and socio-economic costs associated with the use of anti-personnel mines requires urgent action on the part of the international community to ban and eliminate this type of weapon;2. a conviction that until such a ban is achieved, States must work to encourage universal adherence to the prohibitions or restrictions on antipersonnel mines as contained in the amended Protocol II of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons;

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Díaz Figueroa, Mariana, Anderson Henao Orozco, Jesús Martínez, and Wanda Muñoz Jaime. "The risks of autonomous weapons: An analysis centred on the rights of persons with disabilities." International Review of the Red Cross, November 7, 2022, 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1816383122000881.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Autonomous weapons systems have been the subject of heated debate since 2010, when Philip Alston, then Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions, brought the issue to the international spotlight in his interim report to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly 65th Session. Alston affirmed that “automated technologies are becoming increasingly sophisticated, and artificial intelligence reasoning and decision-making abilities are actively being researched and receive significant funding. States’ militaries and defence industry developers are working to develop ‘fully autonomous capability’, such that technological advances in artificial intelligence will enable unmanned aerial vehicles to make and execute complex decisions, including the identification of human targets and the ability to kill them.”1 Later, in 2013, Christof Heyns, who was Special Rapporteur for Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions at the time, published a report that elaborated further on the issues raised by what he called “lethal autonomous robotics”.2 Following a recommendation by Advisory Board on Disarmament Matters at the UN General Assembly 68th Session, the 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, as amended on 21 December 2021, started discussing autonomous weapons systems in 2014. Then, the Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (GGE on LAWS)3 was created in 2016 to focus on this issue.4 While the group has kept meeting since then, no clear steps have been taken yet towards a normative framework on autonomous weapons as of September 2022. In all these years, persons with disabilities – including conflict survivors – have not been included in discussions, nor has the disability perspective been reflected in international debate on autonomous weapons. Only recently has there been any effort to consider the rights of persons with disabilities when examining ethical questions related to artificial intelligence (AI). In this article, we will examine how and why autonomous weapons have a disproportionate impact on persons with disabilities, because of the discrimination that results from a combination of factors such as bias in AI, bias in the military and the police, barriers to justice and humanitarian assistance in situations of armed conflict, and the lack of consultation and participation of persons with disabilities and their representative organizations on issues related to autonomy in weapons systems.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

"STATES PARTIES TO THE 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 (AND PROTOCOLS)." Refugee Survey Quarterly 15, no. 2 (January 1, 1996): 152–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rsq/15.2.152.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

"Conference of the States Parties to the 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: Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and other Devices (Protocol II) as Amended, and Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons (Protocol IV)." International Legal Materials 35, no. 5 (September 1996): 1206–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020782900024438.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!