ABSTRACT. Fletcher holds that while other principles of morality apply, such as reciprocity and the responsibility of commanders and soldiers for criminal acts, justice is not an appropriate consideration in the law of war. Emerton and Handfield draw upon the morality of individual self-defence to explain certain important features of the traditional jus in bello. Hehir claims that the Just War Ethic (JWE) distinguishes between morally legitimate and morally harmful methods of using force. Fabre maintains that the requirement of legitimate authority stipulates who can judge whether the war is just, as well as who can act on the basis of that judgement. Orend posits that the overwhelming amount of attention in Just War theory and in international law has to do with the justice of resorting to war, the justice of conduct in war, and that there is next to nothing about justice after war.


Politehnica University, Bucharest
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Home | About Us | Events | Our Team | Contributors | Peer Reviewers | Editing Services | Books | Contact | Online Access

© 2009 Addleton Academic Publishers. All Rights Reserved.

Joomla templates by Joomlashine