Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Law & Ethics of Human Rights

Editor-in-Chief: Stopler, Gila

Editorial Board: Benvenisti, Eyal / Cohen-Eliya, Moshe / Macedo, Stephen / Rosenblum, Nancy


CiteScore 2018: 0.19

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.118
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.225

Online
ISSN
1938-2545
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 4, Issue 2

Issues

Thin or Thick? The Principle of Proportionality and International Humanitarian Law

Georg Nolte
Published Online: 2010-09-30 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1938-2545.1050

Proportionality, as a concept, does not contain any inherent standards, but rather refers to a proper balance between all relevant factors. It is nevertheless necessary to make analytical distinctions that help identify the premises of its application within different contexts. This is particularly true for an area like international humanitarian law in which a proper focusing of the principle of proportionality is crucial. This article suggests that the distinction between a “thin” and a “thick” approach is a helpful analytical tool depending on the number and the character of factors to be taken into account in the application of the principle of proportionality. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Israel on the permissibility of “targeted killings” is used to exemplify the drawbacks and advantages of both approaches.

Keywords: proportionality; humanitarian law; targeted killings

About the article

Published Online: 2010-09-30


Citation Information: Law & Ethics of Human Rights, Volume 4, Issue 2, Pages 245–255, ISSN (Online) 1938-2545, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1938-2545.1050.

Export Citation

©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Thomas Boysen Anker, Klemens Kappel, Douglas Eadie, and Peter Sandøe
Marketing Theory, 2012, Volume 12, Number 3, Page 267

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in