Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Ambiguity in the law (1)
- Arab States (1)
- Armed conflict (1)
- Civilians (1)
- Combatants (1)
-
- Compensation (1)
- Damage (1)
- Enemy Nationals (1)
- Ethnic (1)
- Ethnic Conflict (1)
- Human rights (1)
- Human rights law (1)
- International law (1)
- Israel (1)
- Israeli (1)
- Judicial (1)
- Liberty (1)
- Middle East (1)
- National (1)
- Origins (1)
- Palestinian (1)
- Peace settlement (1)
- Policies (1)
- Property (1)
- Property interests (1)
- Refugee (1)
- Refugee property (1)
- Religious (1)
- Restitution (1)
- Rights-based approach (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Human Rights Law
Restitution As A Remedy For Refugee Property Claims In The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Michael Kagan
Restitution As A Remedy For Refugee Property Claims In The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Michael Kagan
Scholarly Works
This Article examines restitution as an autonomous human right for refugees displaced in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and assesses the implications of taking such a rights-based approach. The author concludes that the refugees have a strong legal claim to restitution. In international law, compensation is relevant only when restitution is materially impossible, where property has been damaged or declined in value so that restitution is not a complete remedy for the victim's loss or where a refugee chooses not to seek restitution. Current empirical research about land usage in Israel indicates that a great deal, and possibly the majority, of lost …
Destructive Ambiguity: Enemy Nationals And The Legal Enabling Of Ethnic Conflict In The Middle East, Michael Kagan
Destructive Ambiguity: Enemy Nationals And The Legal Enabling Of Ethnic Conflict In The Middle East, Michael Kagan
Scholarly Works
In the course of the Middle East conflict since 1948, both the Arab states and Israel have tended to take harsh measures against civilians based on their national, ethnic, and religious origins. This practice has been partially legitimized by a norm in international law that permits states to infringe the liberty and property interests of enemy nationals during armed conflict. Middle Eastern governments have misused the logic behind this theoretically exceptional rule to justify far-reaching measures that undermine the “principle of distinction” between civilians and combatants and erode the principle of non-discrimination that lies at the center of human rights …