Browsing by Subject "international Law"

Sort by: Order: Results:

Now showing items 1-2 of 2
  • Creutz, Katja (Hakapaino, 2015)
    This thesis explores the law of state responsibility in international law from a critical standpoint. The main argument is that there are no longer justifications for holding state responsibility as the foremost responsibility system in international law. The importance of state responsibility has diminished; state responsibility has moved from a paradigm to the periphery in the international legal order. The thesis advances on two fronts to prove the veracity of the argument. First, it evaluates the law of state responsibility as adopted in the International Law Commission s 2001 Articles on State Responsibility in order to pinpoint problems in the general state responsibility rules. Second, the thesis explores how alternative constructions of responsibility, that is international liability and international criminal law, have overtaken portions of the state responsibility domain. Functionality is presented as the most suitable appraisal framework for an analysis of how state responsibility rules respond to challenges such as globalization and its actors, the diversity of responsibility ideas, and the normative fragmentation of responsibility in international law. The thesis thus prioritizes the practical usefulness of a responsibility regime in international law rather than abstract system-building functions. The exploration into the functionality of rules for state responsibility is preceded by an excursion into the evolution of state responsibility. The historical outlook will reveal how the rules developed, what dilemmas have characterized the state responsibility project and how these tensions have affected the formation of the ILC state responsibility rules. The critical appraisal of the general rules of state responsibility addresses a range of problems that relate to legal pluralization, form, function and implementation. It is argued that the state responsibility rules are unable to respond to the multi-actor and multi-issue world, to norm differentiation, and to the diversity of function, all of which contributes to the marginalization of the law of state responsibility. The thesis contends that the decision to create one all-embracing responsibility system for all kinds of violations of international law in order to build a credible international legal order actually led to lessened functionality. Real-world problems of crucial importance to the international community cannot be effectively handled under the state responsibility regime. From the demerits of state responsibility, the thesis proceeds to explore particularized responsibility regimes that have developed and strengthened as alternatives to state responsibility. International liability and international criminal law rules are explored from specific points of functionality that state responsibility is ill-suited to handle, i.e. social control, collectivity and the signalling effect. It is submitted that their particularity is an asset that allows regimes to deal with real problems in flexible and creative ways. They have thus effectively contributed to the side-tracking of state responsibility.
  • Kremer, Jens (Helsingin yliopisto, 2017)
    This dissertation analyses specific privacy problems arising from the surveillance of public spaces. It studies the scope and limitations of the human right to privacy and a right to personal data protection in light of advanced surveillance and security technologies. The main research question therefore asks how the existing European fundamental rights to privacy and data protection address increasing surveillance and the unprecedented surveillance capabilities of public spaces in Europe. This study is divided into two main parts. After introducing the research problem and a descriptive discussion of existing and future surveillance technologies, the first part discusses the theoretical conceptions behind this research, namely the concept of public space, privacy, data protection and security. Part two of this study then discusses four more specific issues in relation to public space surveillance: Individually targeted surveillance, mass surveillance, surveillance done by private actors, automation of surveillance, and incident prediction. In order to address the research question, this study analyses existing legislation, jurisprudence and specific cases. The overall framework for analyses is derived from a fictional urban surveillance scenario, representing a large European city. This surveillance scenario serves as an anchor point to identify central problems and issues for further fundamental rights based analyses. In that sense, this study uses legal and critical analyses of a specific scenario in order to identify existing, but also potential future legal problems arising from sophisticated public space surveillance. This study consequently identifies several ways to address public space surveillance from a European fundamental rights perspective. The analyses of a right to privacy and a right to personal data protection show that the European system of fundamental rights protection is very well capable of addressing legal problems arising from public surveillance. However, there is a lack of available case law dealing with complex technological surveillance in Europe. This study therefore distils two main approaches for addressing public surveillance: The first approach is based on individual freedom, relying on the legitimate expectations of legal subjects, the second, which is derived from human dignity and personality rights, challenges the communal effects of surveillance. Each approach comes with a fundamentally opposite take on public surveillance. Furthermore, this study shows, how data protection functions as a gap-filler between the two approaches. In its conclusion, this study therefore illustrates several ways to address public space surveillance, and it shows that there is a series of legal problems arising from sophisticated technological surveillance, which require a reformulation of legal arguments addressing public place surveillance.