Convention Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events! Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf. Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets! Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more! Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering. Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more! Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches! Click here for more information.
Association: Name: International Studies Association URL: http://www.isanet.org
Citation: URL: http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p74057_index.html Direct Link: HTML Code:

Parrish, Richard. "The International Legal Status of Voluntary Human Shields" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, Mar 17, 2004 <Not Available>. 2009-05-26 <http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p74057_index.html>

Parrish, R. , 2004-03-17 "The International Legal Status of Voluntary Human Shields" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Online <.PDF>. 2009-05-26 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p74057_index.html

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript Review Method: Peer Reviewed Abstract: Voluntary human shields have so far been active in Israel, Afghanistan, and Iraq. As it seems reasonable to assume that their presence will to continue to increase, their status under international law must be codified. During the US's build-up to war with Iraq in 2003, dozens of peace activists traveled to Iraq to serve as voluntary human shields. Their goal was to protect various sites throughout the country from destruction by using their civilian status as a deterrent to US or British attack. Although their goals were clear, their legal status was not. In fact, voluntary human shields do not fit into any of the accepted categories recognized by international law. Furthermore, while there is a substantial body of literature on the status and use of involuntary human shields (i.e. hostages), little has been written about volunteers. My paper attempts to provide a much-needed examination of the legal status of voluntary human shields both during and after international armed conflict. I therefore begin with a discussion of how voluntary human shields do not fit into any of the accepted categories recognized by international law. For example, taking part in hostilities is one of the characterizing distinctions between civilians and belligerents. Human shields, however, do not appear to be taking part in hostilities in any recognized way. In both the Hague and Geneva Conventions, the concept of belligerency is based on the possession and use of weapons, but human shields are not armed. Illegal combatancy similarly requires the possession of weapons, so voluntary human shields do not fit in that category, either. Perhaps the closest legally recognized analog is the civilian authorized to accompany the armed forces of a state, as described in the Geneva Convention. This analogy, however, raises as many conundra as it resolves. If the presence of a voluntary human shield is not authorized by his host military, under current law he cannot be treated as a prisoner of war. If he does have the proper authorization, his host military may be in violation of international protocols which prohibit the use of civilians as shields. In that situation, the human shield himself might be entitled to prisoner of war status on the theory that a treaty violation by his host military should not be held against the shield himself. In either event, voluntary human shields should not be treated as civilians when military commanders are deciding whether or not to strike a target where human shields are present. What is needed is a resolution in international law regarding the status of voluntary human shields. An approach to that resolution is presented by this paper. This will provide both the shields and the parties to an armed conflict guidance regarding the proper treatment of these volunteers, both during and after military operations against a site where they are located.

The Unlocked Door in the Inter-American Human Rights System: Why States Recognize and Withdraw from Voluntary Regional Human Rights Courts

Force Protection, Military Accountability, and the Response of Civilian Leadership: Culpability for the Terrorist Bombings of U.S. Military Forces Abroad