The role of necessity in international humanitarian and human rights law

The nature of armed conflict has changed dramatically in recent decades. In particular, it is increasingly the case that hostilities now occur alongside ‘everyday’ situations. This has led to a pressing need to determine when a ‘conduct of hostilities’ model (governed by international humanitarian law—IHL) applies and when a ‘law enforcement’ model (governed by international human rights law—IHRL) applies. This in turn raises the question of whether these two legal regimes are incompatible or whether they might be applied in parallel. It is on this question that the current paper focuses, examining it at the level of principle. Whilst most accounts of the principles underlying these two areas of law focus on humanitarian considerations, few have compared the role played by necessity in each. This paper seeks to address this omission. It demonstrates that considerations of necessity play a prominent role in both IHL and IHRL, albeit with differing consequences. It then applies this necessity-based analysis to suggest a principled basis for rationalising the relationship between IHL and IHRL, demonstrating how this approach would operate in practice. It is shown that, by emphasising the role of necessity in IHL and IHRL, an approach can be adopted that reconciles the two in a manner that is sympathetic to their object and purpose.

Just another case of treaty interpretation? Reconciling humanitarian law and human rights law in the ICJ

This chapter offers a fresh critique of the approach taken by the International Court of Justice to the relationship between humanitarian law and human rights law. In so doing, it seeks to move beyond the intractable debates that have dominated this area, offering an original account of the relationship that is firmly grounded in general international law concepts of treaty interpretation.

Religious and spiritual identity and citizenship education in the UK

If education is to be about ‘human flourishing’ (De Ruyter, 2004) as well as preparation for adulthood and work, then religious and citizenship education would seem to have a key contribution towards this goal, both offering opportunities for the exploration and development of a robust sense of identity. However, despite the opposition of most religious educators, religious education has been treated by successive UK governments simply as a form of inculcation into a homogenous notion of citizenship based on nominal church attendance. Moreover, the teaching of the relatively new subject of citizenship education, whilst recognising that the sense of identity and allegiance is complex, has not regularly included faith perspectives. I argue that the concept of ‘spiritual development’, which centres on an existential sense of identity, offers a justification for combining lessons in both religious and citizenship education. I conclude on a cautionary note, arguing that pupils need to be given a critical awareness of ways in which such identities can be provided for them by default, particularly since consumer culture increasingly makes use of ‘spiritual’ language and imagery.