Uccisioni mirate, legittima difesa preventiva e diritti umani

Risultato della ricerca: Article

Abstract

Targeted killings by drones on the territory of other States has increasingly become the US Administration’s weapon of choice in the war against terrorism. According to the US, these operations constitute a justified use of self-defensive force «against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people» (Remarks by the President at the National Defense University, 23 May 2013, www.whitehouse.gov). The aim of the present article is to assess the validity of this justification under both ius ad bellum and international human rights law. To this end, Section 1 introduces the arguments advanced by the US Administration. Section 2 explores the admissibility of anticipatory self-defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Section 3 focuses on the temporal standard defining the permissible use of lethal force in law enforcement operations. Section 4 finally offers some brief concluding remarks
Lingua originaleItalian
pagine (da-a)-
Numero di pagine23
RivistaDIRITTI UMANI E DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE
Stato di pubblicazionePublished - 2018

Cita questo

@article{50379a22ace94f9abefc33275e3d0a50,
title = "Uccisioni mirate, legittima difesa preventiva e diritti umani",
abstract = "Targeted killings by drones on the territory of other States has increasingly become the US Administration’s weapon of choice in the war against terrorism. According to the US, these operations constitute a justified use of self-defensive force «against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people» (Remarks by the President at the National Defense University, 23 May 2013, www.whitehouse.gov). The aim of the present article is to assess the validity of this justification under both ius ad bellum and international human rights law. To this end, Section 1 introduces the arguments advanced by the US Administration. Section 2 explores the admissibility of anticipatory self-defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Section 3 focuses on the temporal standard defining the permissible use of lethal force in law enforcement operations. Section 4 finally offers some brief concluding remarks",
author = "Enzamaria Tramontana",
year = "2018",
language = "Italian",
pages = "--",
journal = "DIRITTI UMANI E DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE",
issn = "1971-7105",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Uccisioni mirate, legittima difesa preventiva e diritti umani

AU - Tramontana, Enzamaria

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Targeted killings by drones on the territory of other States has increasingly become the US Administration’s weapon of choice in the war against terrorism. According to the US, these operations constitute a justified use of self-defensive force «against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people» (Remarks by the President at the National Defense University, 23 May 2013, www.whitehouse.gov). The aim of the present article is to assess the validity of this justification under both ius ad bellum and international human rights law. To this end, Section 1 introduces the arguments advanced by the US Administration. Section 2 explores the admissibility of anticipatory self-defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Section 3 focuses on the temporal standard defining the permissible use of lethal force in law enforcement operations. Section 4 finally offers some brief concluding remarks

AB - Targeted killings by drones on the territory of other States has increasingly become the US Administration’s weapon of choice in the war against terrorism. According to the US, these operations constitute a justified use of self-defensive force «against terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people» (Remarks by the President at the National Defense University, 23 May 2013, www.whitehouse.gov). The aim of the present article is to assess the validity of this justification under both ius ad bellum and international human rights law. To this end, Section 1 introduces the arguments advanced by the US Administration. Section 2 explores the admissibility of anticipatory self-defence under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and customary international law. Section 3 focuses on the temporal standard defining the permissible use of lethal force in law enforcement operations. Section 4 finally offers some brief concluding remarks

UR - http://hdl.handle.net/10447/349487

M3 - Article

SP - -

JO - DIRITTI UMANI E DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE

JF - DIRITTI UMANI E DIRITTO INTERNAZIONALE

SN - 1971-7105

ER -