Applying a sovereign agency theory of the law of armed conflict
Eric Talbot Jensen
Host item entries:
Chicago journal of international law, Vol. 12, no. 2, Winter 2012, p. 685-727
The current bifurcated conflict classification paradigm for applying the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) has lost its usefulness. Regulation of state militaries was originally based on the principle that the armed forces of a state were acting as the sovereign agents of the state and were granted privileges and given duties based on that grant of agency. These privileges and duties became the bases for the formulation of the modern LOAC. During the twentieth century, the LOAC became bifurcated, with the complete LOAC applying only to armed conflicts between sovereigns and only few provisions of the law applying to armed conflicts that were not between sovereigns. This bifurcation has led to a lack of clarity for the sovereign's agents in LOAC application and given states the ability to manipulate which law applies to application of force through their agents. The applicability of the LOAC should no longer be based on the manipulable and unclear conflict classification paradigm, but should instead return to its foundations in the sovereign's grant of agency. Thus, anytime a sovereign applies violent force through its armed forces, those armed forces should apply the full LOAC to their actions, regardless of the type or of the conflict.
By entering this website, you consent to the use of technologies, such as cookies and analytics, to customise content, advertising and provide social media features. This will be used to analyse traffic to the website, allowing us to understand visitor preferences and improving our services. Learn more