Book Review: Non-State Actors and Terrorism; Applying the Law of State Responsibility and the Due Diligence Principle

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Allen Engle
Keyword(s):  
State Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law

The Due Diligence Principle Under International Law

2006 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Barnidge
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
State Actors ◽  
International Law Commission ◽  
Law Commission

AbstractThis article explores the interface of state responsibility, non-state actors, and the due diligence principle. It begins by examining the various principles of responsibility under international law. After doing so, it closely considers the deliberations of the International Law Commission on the topic of state responsibility. In light of these developments, attention is then paid to exactly what has been expected of states with regard to the activities of non-state actors during the last century. This overview focuses on the due diligence principle, a principle which, it is argued, can be restrictively or expansively interpreted, as the particular facts and circumstances require, to hold states responsible for their actions or omissions related to non-state actors.

Due Diligence in the History of the Codification of the Law of State Responsibility

2020 ◽  
pp. 42-58
Author(s):  
Helmut Philipp Aust ◽  
Prisca Feihle
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
Special Rapporteur ◽  
Central Notion ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law

This chapter sheds light on the role that due diligence played throughout the drafting history of the International Law Commission’s (ILC) Articles on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ARSIWA). It argues that the narrative that due diligence developed as a notion in the realm of the so-called ‘secondary rules’ of the law of state responsibility—before then later migrating into the domain of ‘primary rules’—needs to be qualified to some extent. An exegesis of the mostly overlooked work of the first Special Rapporteur on State Responsibility of the ILC, F. V. García-Amador, shows that due diligence was already a central notion of this field before the ILC took the turn towards redefining state responsibility as comprising only ‘secondary rules’. The chapter demonstrates that, despite the ILC decision to define the notion of state responsibility as objective, not all traces of subjectivity—to which the category of due diligence belongs—disappeared from the work of the ILC.

State Responsibility for Acts of Non-state Actors: A Comment on Griebel and Plücken

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
MARKO MILANOVIĆ
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Recent Analysis ◽  
Modern World ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
And Control

AbstractThis article comments on Jörn Griebel and Milan Plücken's recent analysis in the Leiden Journal of International Law of the approach of the International Court of Justice to state responsibility in its judgment in the Genocide (Bosnia v. Serbia) case. The article also provides more general remarks on the law of state responsibility as it pertains to acts of non-state actors. In that regard, it discusses attribution based on de facto organ status and attribution based on direction and control, as well as whether, as a matter of policy, the law of state responsibility meets the needs of the modern world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document