| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
126884
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 181, calling for the partition of Mandatory Palestine into two independent states - one for the Palestinian Arabs and one for the Jews - and for the designation of Jerusalem and its traditional link with Bethlehem as corpus separatum: a separate entity under special international protection to be administrated by an international body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
039629
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
London, Mansell Publishing, 1987.
|
| Description |
xiii, 169p.
|
| Series |
Keyguide series
|
| Standard Number |
0720118735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copies: C:1/I:0,R:0,Q:0
Circulation
| Accession# | Call# | Current Location | Status | Policy | Location |
| 029297 | 341.481016/AND 029297 | Main | On Shelf | General | |
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
133477
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Latin American governments, social movements, and regional organizations have made a far greater contribution to the idea and practice of international human rights than has previously been recognized. Most discussions of the global human rights regime stress its origins in the countries of the Global North. This article explores the role of Latin America states as early protagonists of the international protection of human rights, focusing in particular on the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man. Histories of human rights in the world emphasize the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, passed by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1948, as the founding moment of international human rights. Few know that Latin American states passed a similar American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man a full eight months before passage of the UDHR. The American Declaration thus was the first broad enumeration of rights adopted by an intergovernmental organization. This article explores the American Declaration as an example of often overlooked Latin American human rights protagonism that has continued to this day, and that calls into question the idea that human rights originated in only the Global North.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
131697
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The principle of non-combatant immunity protects non-combatants against intentional attacks in war. It is the most widely endorsed and deeply held moral constraint on the conduct of war. And yet it is difficult to justify. Recent developments in just war theory have undermined the canonical argument in its favour - Michael Walzer's, in Just and Unjust Wars. Some now deny that non-combatant immunity has principled foundations, arguing instead that it is entirely explained by a different principle: that of necessity. In war, as in ordinary life, harms to others can be justified only if they are necessary. Attacking non-combatants, the argument goes, is never necessary, so never justified. Although often repeated, this argument has never been explored in depth. In this article, I evaluate the necessity-based argument for non-combatant immunity, drawing together theoretical analysis and empirical research on anti-civilian tactics in interstate warfare, counterinsurgency, and terrorism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|