Incidentality of the civilian harm in international humanitarian law and its Contra Legem antonyms in recent discourses on the laws of war

Author:

Daniele LuigiORCID

Abstract

Abstract This article develops an interpretative effort to clarify the meaning of the notion of incidentality of the civilian harm in international humanitarian law (IHL), with particular concern to the role of this concept as normative cornerstone for a systematic reading, and coherent implementation, of the law of targeting. The article begins with a critical analysis of recent discourses on the laws of war, focusing on the emergence and growth of contra legem uses of the concept of ‘collateral damage’. These discourses revolve around proportionality in attacks, commonly re-translating this rule by removing incidentality as legal qualifier of the civilian harm susceptible of proportionality assessments. The article shows that proportionality misconceptions neglecting incidentality have become so common and accepted as to be often confused with structural features of IHL. On the contrary, the analysis highlights the collisions between these conceptions, on the one hand, and IHL targeting prescriptions, their interplay and protective functions, on the other, unveiling how the former result in promoting unlimited expansions of the entity of civilian harm that can be object of proportionality assessments, even when this civilian harm constitutes the largely preponderant, main anticipated result of a given attack. Within a background of unequal relativization of international humanitarian law (IHL) parameters, minimalist understandings of incidentality have also been the basis of questionable orientations about attacks on residential tower buildings, reproducing exponential ‘militarizations’ of civilian objects (and at times of the protected persons therein) for proximity with lawful targets. Cumulatively, these discourses and scholarly orientations contributing to depriving proportionality of its incidentality requirement continue to produce dramatic consequences for civilian protection worldwide and provide aggressive military powers with arguments functional to circumvent the prohibitions of disproportionate and indiscriminate attacks. Against these tendencies, it is proposed that the notion of incidentality of the civilian harm, in homage to letter, object, and protective purpose of IHL, and understood with the interpretative help of mens rea categories, should be strictly construed and urgently re-centralized by laws of war scholars as a fundamental conditio sine qua non for proportionality assessments and as main dividing line between the operative spheres of distinction and proportionality.

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. On international law and Gaza: critical reflections;London Review of International Law;2024-07-29

2. A Threshold Crossed: On Genocidal Intent and the Duty to Prevent Genocide in Palestine;Journal of Genocide Research;2024-05-09

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3