State accountability under international law : holding states accountable for a breach of jus cogens norms /

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Author / Creator:Yarwood, Lisa.
Imprint:Oxon ; New York : Routledge, 2011.
Description:xvi, 182 p. ; 24 cm.
Language:English
Subject:Jus cogens (International law)
Jus cogens (International law)
Format: Print Book
URL for this record:http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/8293624
Hidden Bibliographic Details
ISBN:9780415577830 (hbk.)
0415577837 (hbk.)
9780203837528 (ebk)
0203837525 (ebk)
Notes:Includes bibliographical references (p. [166]-179) and index.
Table of Contents:
  • Acknowledgements
  • Preface
  • Introduction
  • 1. The interpretive framework
  • 2. The substantive concept
  • 1. Breaking state accountability down to its conceptual parts
  • 1.1. æAccountabilityÆ
  • 1.1.1. Linguistic interpretation
  • 1.1.1.1. The difference between accountability and responsibility
  • 1.1.1.2. The relationship between accountability and impunity
  • 1.1.2. A trend toward bottom-up accountability?
  • 1.1.3. Interpreting accountability in the context of human rights
  • 1.1.4. Is there a legal obligation to ensure accountability?
  • 1.1.5. A working understanding if accountability
  • 1.2. The 'state'
  • 1.3. Conclusion
  • 2. State accountability as a conceptual whole
  • 2.1. The scope of the ad hoc accountability practice for analysis
  • 2.2. A tentative set of accountability criteria
  • 2.2.1. Is state accountability associated with criminal accountability?
  • 2.2.2. Is state accountability associated with state responsibility?
  • 2.2.3. Is state accountability associated with the particular law breached?
  • 2.2.4. Is state accountability solely associated with legal accountability?
  • 2.2.5. Is state accountability associated with political or moral accountability?
  • 2.3. Conclusion
  • 3. The relationship between state accountability and jus cogens norms
  • 3.1. Jus cogens as the link between conceptual state accountability and established international law
  • 3.2. The debate and attempting to define jus cogens
  • 3.2.1. Distinguishing jus cogens norms from standard norms
  • 3.2.2. The source and substance of jus cogens
  • 3.2.3. Are states under a positive duty to comply and ensure compliance with jus cogens norms?
  • 3.2.4. Which norms are jus cogens norms?
  • 3.3. A working definition if jus cogens
  • 3.4. Conclusion
  • 4. The relationship between conceptual state accountability and doctrinal state responsibility
  • 4.1. An introduction to the doctrine of state responsibility
  • 4.2. State responsibility under the ILC's Draft Articles
  • 4.2.1. Can the international community as a whole invoke stale responsibility?
  • 4.2.2. Is state responsibility for violating an erga omnes obligation effectual in terms of holding states accountable for breaching the underlying jus cogens norm?
  • 4.2.3. How effective is reparation under the Draft Articles in holding states accountable?
  • 4.3. Juridical support for state accountability in the context of the state responsibility doctrine
  • 4.4. Conclusion
  • 5. State accountability in state practice
  • 5.1. Setting the scene to analyse state accountability in practice
  • 5.1.1. Who determines whether a state breached international law?
  • 5.1.2. What forms of redress ensure the breaching state is held accountable?
  • 5.1.3. Is state accountability solely a state prerogative?
  • 5.2. Case studies
  • 5.2.1. Annenian massacre 1915
  • 5.2.2. Crimes against humanity by the USSR-Holdomor famine 1933 and the Katyn Forest massacre 1940
  • 5.2.3. Apartheid in South Africa
  • 5.2.4. Comparing responses Is state aggresion in the 20th century
  • 5.2.4.1. Invasion of the Republic of Korea 1950
  • 5.2.4.2. Bombing of the Osiraq Nuclear Reactor 1981
  • 5.2.4.3. Invasion of Kuwait 1990
  • 5.2.4.4. Conclusions on the responses to state aggression
  • 5.2.5. Australia's æstolen generationÆ
  • 5.3. Conclusion
  • Conclusion: An accountability epoch?
  • 1. State accountability has no normative standing
  • 2. Stale practice is indicative rather than determination of state accountability
  • 3. State accountability is a legal, political and moral concept
  • 4. State accountability represents a continuum of answerability
  • 5. State accountability is sought on the basis of a norm's substance, not its jus cogens status
  • 6. Characteristics of state accountability
  • 6.1. A mix of motivations
  • 6.2. A mix of accountability seekers
  • 6.3. A mix of responses
  • 7. Moving from lex feranda to lex lata?
  • Bibliography
  • Index