Outcome Bias and Expertise in Investigations under International Humanitarian Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 1303-1318
Author(s):  
Tomer Broude ◽  
Inbar Levy
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Imperfect Information ◽  
Cognitive Outcome ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
General Tendency ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Ex Post ◽  
Operational Decision Making ◽  
Outcome Bias

Abstract Many international law decisions are made by individuals, often possessed with expertise, legal or otherwise. We examine individual international humanitarian law (IHL) decision-making on two levels: military decisions made ex ante regarding real-time operational questions under conditions of uncertainty and imperfect information, and subsequent ex post evaluations of the propriety of military decisions in the context of military investigations regarding legal responsibility with respect to proportionality and reasonableness. IHL requires ex post investigators to consider only information available at the time decisions were made. Through an experimental vignette study conducted with laypersons, legal experts and people with field experience, we test whether they are susceptible to cognitive ‘outcome bias’, specifically the extent to which the knowledge of operational outcomes, especially regarding incidental civilian harm, influences ex post normative evaluations. Our results demonstrate a general tendency towards outcome bias, which is somewhat tempered by expertise. Individuals with operational decision-making experience may be less prone to outcome bias than legal experts. We discuss possible implications for the design of military investigations relating to IHL.

Proportionality in Armed Conflicts: A Principle in Need of Clarification?

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-123
Author(s):  
Ben Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Guidance Document ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Proportionality Principle

In their quest to find ways to reduce civilian casualties during armed conflict, States often emphasise the importance of compliance with fundamental rules of international humanitarian law that apply during the conduct of hostilities. Chief among them are the rules of distinction, proportionality and precaution. This contribution focuses on the proportionality principle. It examines whether there is a need for clarification or development of this rule. After highlighting reasons why clarification of the law on proportionality is necessary, the author proposes a guidance document on proportionality decision-making in armed conflict. To lay the foundation for such a document, the author identifies a range of issues that could be addressed in the document.

scholarly journals الاّليات الدولية لتنفيذ قواعد القانون الدولي الانساني

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 21-46
Author(s):  
حلا الدوري
Keyword(s):  
Complete System ◽  
International Community ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
General Tendency ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Rules

After establishing and completing the rules of the international humanitarian law, what occupies the thoughts and minds of the researchers has become the effectiveness of those legal rules because the international community has created the International Humanitarian Law to decrease the agony and misery of war and to deter anyone who may violate these rules. Without a mechanism of implementation, the international umanitarian law becomes mere ideal expression of ideas, and to activate its, there must be some mechanism to be implemented and to be respected. The mechanism could be supervisory, monitoring, or preventive or even judicial to implement the rules of the international humanitarian law in case of violation of these rules especially with regard to the protection of civilians and spreading the rules of the international humanitarian law. Despite the existence of the comprehensive and detailed international humanitarian law which are highly approved and agreed upon as a complete system of protection but it is unfortunately accompanied by a general tendency towards ignoring and disobeying them.

The EU Guidelines on Promoting Compliance with International Humanitarian Law

2009 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pål Wrange
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Eu

AbstractIn 2005, the European Union (EU) adopted Guidelines on Promoting Compliance with International Humanitarian Law(IHL). The Guidelines are designed to be implemented by any officer in the foreign services of the EU, including its member states. After outlining the main features of IHL, the Guidelines have provisions on the decision-making process and on possible action to take. The Guidelines, which have been quite widely implemented according toa survey, should be an important tool in keeping IHL issues on the EU's agenda.

Shifting from Autonomous Weapons to Military Networks

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léonard Van Rompaey
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Sociotechnical Systems ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
First Century ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Systems Perspective ◽  
Autonomous Weapons ◽  
Human Decision ◽  
Military Networks

The persistent anthropomorphism of lethal autonomous weapons systems (laws) as the replacement for human soldiers creates irrelevant expectations of physical embodiment and cognitive individualization. This anthropomorphism taints the analysis and discussions on the adaptation of international humanitarian law (ihl) by excluding relevant technologies from the scope of discussions. Shifting from laws to a network-centric sociotechnical systems perspective allows to remedy the under inclusiveness of the laws perspective by shifting away from the salient features of laws, in favour of a focus on the interactions with, and influence that the technology has on human decision-making in warfare. By criticizing the relevance of the technological focus of the current diplomatic process, the paper argues that the network-centric perspective is not only more accurate, but also more helpful and practical in adapting ihl to the armed conflicts of the twenty-first century.

scholarly journals Towards effective military training in international humanitarian law

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (895-896) ◽  
pp. 795-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Stubbins Bates
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Military Training ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Integration Model ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Standardized Reporting ◽  
Effective Contribution

AbstractThe obligation to train troops in international humanitarian law (IHL) is simply stated and its implementation delegated to State discretion. This reflects a past assumption that mere dissemination of IHL would be an effective contribution to the prevention of violations. Academic literature has evolved so that dissemination alone is now known to be insufficient for compliance, while the ICRC's integration model emphasizes the relevance of IHL to all aspects of military decision-making. A separate process, the ICRC/Government of Switzerland Initiative on Strengthening Compliance with IHL, is still in its consultative stages at the time of writing, but may result in voluntary State reporting and/or thematic discussions at meetings of States. This article synthesizes academic and practitioner insights on effective IHL training, and suggests a collaborative rubric for informative, standardized reporting on IHL training. Such a rubric could enable States and researchers to share best practice and future innovations on IHL training, using a streamlined, cost-effective tool.

Reflections on the Peacekeeping Failure in Darfur: Is There Any Substance to the 'Responsibility to Protect'?

2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 294-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Barber
Keyword(s):  
Secretary General ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Substantive Content ◽  
Scant Attention ◽  
International Human

AbstractThis paper examines the failure of the African Mission in Sudan (AMIS) to provide protection to civilians in Darfur, and considers the relevance, in this context, of the emerging doctrine of responsibility to protect. It is argued that while the existence of the responsibility to protect has been widely endorsed, there has been relatively scant attention paid to its content. In the context of the AMIS intervention in Darfur, this paper considers the question of what the responsibility to protect actually entails: for peace-support operations, for the states that send them, and most importantly, for the civilian population that expects to be protected by the soldiers sent to protect them. Because the responsibility to protect (as described by the International Commission on State Sovereignty (ICISS) and endorsed by the UN Secretary General, the General Assembly and the Security Council) says little as to positive obligations, such as might require peacesupport operations to actively protect, this paper considers whether there are obligations that can be drawn from international human rights or international humanitarian law that may assist in locating a substantive content for the responsibility to protect. It is suggested, in conclusion, that it is in the law of occupation that we come closest to finding a legal responsibility to protect.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document