This book examines the historical evolution of international humanitarian law, in particular the legal and political bases for the penalisation of infractions associated with this body of law. The interaction of law, politics and financial considerations have proved detrimental for staging criminal prosecutions, even to this day, but ultimately have not negated the criminal liability of perpetrators. The book explores the various forms of direct participation in humanitarian law offences and the concept of the doctrine of superior responsibility. It stipulates the liability of those persons who, being in a position of authority, fail to prevent or punish crimes committed by their subordinates. The book deals with the elaboration of a legal theoretical model, defined as the 'duty to control', which attempts to address the gap identified in the relevant law of causation. It traces the evolution of humanitarian law in the context of non-international armed conflicts, with the aim of determining the application of humanitarian and criminal norms therein. Although for the purposes of humanitarian law the distinction between non-international and international conflicts is becoming less significant, people must still be aware of the mechanism known as 'conflict classification'. The world's major powers, with the exception of the UK, have expressly or implicitly widened their judicial jurisdiction by penalising extraterritorial breaches committed in internal armed conflicts. The book focuses on the legislative and judicial efforts of developed nations, mainly from Europe and North America. For these countries, the suppression of extraterritorial crime is not of imminent importance.
legal theoretical model, defined as the ‘duty to control’, which attempts to address the gap identified in the relevant law of causation. Legal nature of the doctrine of superior responsibility The scope of the doctrine of superior responsibility has been the subject of fierce debate since the end of World War II, whereby its application by military tribunals was
rational, intellectual faculty, creating a sense of split or multiple personalities. The relationship between wind and God echoes the relationship between mind and self in Old English poetry. As with the driver and destroyer, the self and mind may be understood as distinct, yet they also interact in an uneasy master–servant relationship, with the mind or mood urging a conscious ‘I’ while that ‘I’ seeks to control volatile emotion. Echoing the maxim quoted above, The Seafarer reminds us that it is our duty to control the mind: Stieran mon sceal strongum mode, ond þæt
This volume aims to disclose the political, social and cultural factors that influenced the sanitary measures against epidemics developed in the Mediterranean during the long nineteenth century. The contributions to the book provide new interdisciplinary insights to the booming field of ‘quarantine studies’ through a systematic use of the analytic categories of space, identity and power. The ultimate goal is to show the multidimensional nature of quarantine, the intimate links that sanitary administrations and institutions had with the territorial organization of states, international trade, the construction of national, colonial, religious and professional identities or the configuration of political regimes. The circum-Mediterranean geographical spread of the case studies contained in this volume illuminates the similarities and differences around and across this sea, on the southern and northern shores, in Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, Greek, Italian, English and French-speaking domains. At the same time, it is highly interested in engaging in the global English-speaking community, offering a wide range of terms, sources, bibliography, interpretative tools and views produced and elaborated in various Mediterranean countries. The historical approach will be useful to recognize the secular tensions that still lie behind present-day issues such as the return of epidemics or the global flows of migrants and refugees.
be used to achieve wherever possible a stable level of demand. According to James Meade: It is now universally recognised by governments, at least throughout the industrialised free-enterprise world, that it is one of the primary duties to control the level of total effective
1862 (6.6 R). Lazarettos and seaborne infectious diseases The port official responsible for the surveillance of every ship approaching the islands was a state appointed physician. These officers had the duty to control the ship’s bill of health (the so-called Fede di Sanità), which confirmed that the port of departure was free from infectious diseases.15 The certificates were signed by the British ambassadors or 262 Power consuls in states such as the Ottoman Empire, Italy and the newly independent Greek territories. Captains were required to answer the physician
been drafted into the city for duty to control the crowds on the streets.15 Lady Horridge took an avid interest in the case and sat to her husband’s left on each day of the trial.16 Like Birkett, Sir Thomas Gardner Horridge was both a Lancashire native (born in Bolton) and a former Liberal MP (for East Manchester). As a lawyer, he had been primarily concerned with commercial issues, and, in 1910, he was appointed to the King’s Bench Division. He was seen as ‘sound, competent, dignified, and expeditious’, though also ‘somewhat brusque’ in his dealings with counsel
understood to be man’s innate sexual desires – desires that could not be expected to be met fully by wives.55 Classified as somehow ‘less’ than women, the morally and medically ‘unclean’ prostitutes were perceived as a race apart and judged as a deviant group which the state had a duty to control. The CDA illustrated a principal example of how this control was instituted, as prostitutes became subject to the withdrawal of their civil liberties and the imposition of a degrading intimate medical examination. Although ‘voluntary’ in nature, if a woman refused to submit to
princes have power so that they can strengthen ecclesiastical discipline’. 21 From this conclusion it is evident, first, that the said princes should be part of the said church, since otherwise they would not be within the church in this proposition. Second, it is evident that it is their duty to control rebels of the church wherever coercive power is required by civil authority. Hence, John of God notes eight contexts in which an ecclesiastic is subject to secular judgement or correction: the first is when a cleric is incorrigible; the second is when a cleric, even a