WEKO3
アイテム
〈Articles〉ジェノサイド条約の防止義務に基づく拒否権の法的制限に関する一考察―J. Heieck の議論をめぐって―
https://kindai.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/21275
https://kindai.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/21275efc30b4d-a156-4b6b-b82f-9e1acfb47f9b
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
AA12777724-20201100-0043.pdf (977.9 kB)
|
|
| Item type | ☆紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2020-12-24 | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | 〈Articles〉ジェノサイド条約の防止義務に基づく拒否権の法的制限に関する一考察―J. Heieck の議論をめぐって― | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | 〈Articles〉The Duty to Prevent Genocide or the Right to Veto? : Toward a Harmonious Interpretation of the UN Charter and the Genocide Convention | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 著者 |
瀬岡, 直
× 瀬岡, 直
|
|||||||||
| 言語 | ||||||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 主題 | ジェノサイド条約, 防止義務, 相当の注意, 拒否権, 調和的解釈, 人道的介入 | |||||||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||||||
| 著者(英) | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 値 | Seoka, Nao | |||||||||
| 著者 所属 | ||||||||||
| 値 | Faculty of International Studies, Kindai University; Associate Professor | |||||||||
| 版 | ||||||||||
| 出版タイプ | NA | |||||||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_be7fb7dd8ff6fe43 | |||||||||
| 出版者 名前 | ||||||||||
| 出版者 | Faculty of International Studies, Kindai University | |||||||||
| 書誌情報 |
Journal of International Studies 号 5, p. 43-73, 発行日 2020-11 |
|||||||||
| ISSN | ||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | 24322938 | |||||||||
| 抄録 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | [Abstract] In 2007, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) made a landmark decision in Bosnia v. Serbia, in which the Court argued that a state must use its given power to prevent genocide including those that are likely to happen outside its state boundaries, when the state has the capacity and power to effectively influence the course of the event. This case has generated discussion amongst scholars who work on the prevention of genocide. John Heieck, the author of A Duty to Prevent Genocide: Due Diligence Obligations among the P5 (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2018), provided one of the most critical analyses of the case and contributed the following argument. Under the due diligence standard, Heieck argued, the permanent members of the UN Security Council must refrain from exercising their veto power on resolutions proposed to prevent genocide, believing that states, especially great powers, must accept the full responsibility of employing all means available for the purpose. He then drew a simple conclusion that the prevention of genocide is a jus cogens norm that restrict veto use, disregarding the UN Charter that provides a legal basis for the veto power. This paper provides more careful analysis of the case and suggests adopting a harmonious interpretation of the UN Charter and the Genocide Convention. | |||||||||
| フォーマット | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | application/pdf | |||||||||
