CONFRONTING STATE COMPLICITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The naked pursuit of national interest in foreign policies is widely accepted, expected, and encouraged. National leaders give token consideration for the human rights implications of their foreign policy and rarely acknowledge their legal obligation to promote and ensure human rights both within an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:UCLA journal of international law and foreign affairs 2002-04, Vol.7 (1), p.99-127
Main Author: Nahapetian, Kate
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Comments
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The naked pursuit of national interest in foreign policies is widely accepted, expected, and encouraged. National leaders give token consideration for the human rights implications of their foreign policy and rarely acknowledge their legal obligation to promote and ensure human rights both within and beyond their borders. Much of the scholarship has focused on the legal obligations not to commit human rights abuses directly. This article, however, aims to shed some light on a state's responsibility for indirectly contributing to human rights or humanitarian law violations through either its military arms sales, financial assistance, or political support. The obligation to refrain from contributing to human rights abuses abroad is well established in numerous international treaties. In particular, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1949 Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, the U.N. Charter, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, as well as customary international law will be examined below.
ISSN:1089-2605
2169-7833