/library/oar/handle/123456789/1906 Mon, 10 Nov 2025 20:03:58 GMT 2025-11-10T20:03:58Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/135865 Title: Lessons for future global health crises : examining the challenges of balancing public health interventions and human rights during the COVID-19 pandemic Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic has presented governments with an unprecedented challenge: how to effectively protect life and public health while preserving individual rights and freedoms. In response, governments have implemented various measures that have raised concerns regarding their alignment with human rights. This dissertation examines the legal and evidentiary bases governments have used to jus8fy measures that potentially restricted rights such as privacy and liberty, focusing on their alignment with international human rights standards. The research employs a doctrinal approach to analyse the interplay between individual rights and public health measures during a global health crisis. It scrutinises relevant international laws, regula8ons, and precedents that authorised such measures, as well as how international courts and bodies have balanced public health imperatives with human rights obligations. Central to this analysis is the application of international legal principles, including the necessity and proportionality of measures as outlined in international instruments and relevant jurisprudence from bodies like the European Court of Human Rights. The dissertation will thus engage with concerns regarding the implementation of public health measures that arise from the analysis of the legal and evidentiary bases that governments used to jus8fy their COVID-19 measures that are grounded in international law frameworks, as well as recommendations for more human rights-centred government responses in future pandemics. This research addresses a gap in the literature by providing an in-depth analysis of COVID-19 case decisions, the relationship between the evidential and legal bases of such measures, and their application in such cases. It explores how states have interpreted and applied their obligations under international law during the pandemic, including derogations from human rights treaties. The examination reveals inconsistencies and potential weaknesses in the legal and evidentiary foundations used by governments to jus8fy their COVID-19 measures when viewed through the lens of international law. It aims to contribute to the development of a more robust human rights framework for future global health emergencies. Description: LL.M. Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMT /library/oar/handle/123456789/135865 2025-01-01T00:00:00Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/135862 Title: Assessing human rights violations in migrant rescues : a comparative analysis Abstract: In the last decade, the Mediterranean Sea has emerged as one of the main migratory routes used by thousands of people who, in search of better opportunities and a safer life, face the dangers inherent to these crossings in the hope of reaching Europe. However, the precariousness of the conditions in which these crossings are carried out is a determining factor that has contributed significantly to the tragic outcomes in the Mediterranean. In this context, the search and rescue (SAR) services of coastal States play a crucial role in safeguarding human life at sea, underscoring the urgent need to reinforce such operations to address this humanitarian crisis. This study aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the regulatory framework governing SAR operations in order to identify its main shortcomings and the challenges that have hindered the incorporation of humanitarian considerations in its implementation and development. A mix of research methods is employed for this purpose: the comparative legal research and the doctrinal research. This approach allows for an in-depth analysis of SAR cooperation between States from both a theoretical and practical perspective. In this regard, a comparative analysis of joint SAR operations between Italy and Malta in the central Mediterranean, and between Spain and Morocco, in the western Mediterranean has been carried out. The results reveal the main differences in the practice of SAR cooperation in these two migratory contexts, as well as the fundamental challenges to be overcome in order to achieve a more effective SAR regulation, in which humanitarian considerations and the interest in the protection of human life at sea prevail over the traditional sovereignty and security interests of States in the face of irregular immigration. Description: LL.M. Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 GMT /library/oar/handle/123456789/135862 2024-01-01T00:00:00Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/128698 Title: Terrorism : should it constitute a crime against humanity? Abstract: This abstract explores the controversial question of whether terrorism should be considered a crime against humanity. The indiscriminate and far-reaching effects of terrorism have prompted discussions regarding its classification within the framework of international law. This study endeavours to provide a comprehensive evaluation of whether terrorism satisfies the contextual requirements for crimes against humanity by analysing the essential elements of crimes against humanity and applying them to terrorism acts. Incorporating legal definitions, historical context, and international conventions, this study examines the obstacles raised by the international community for excluding terrorism from the ICC Statute as well as the definitional problem of a lack of international consensus on terrorism's definition. It examines the contextual elements necessary for an act to be classified as a crime against humanity, contrasting these criteria with the often erratic and sporadic nature of terrorist activities. In addition, the paper investigates the concept of terrorism and its impact on international law, contrasting it with the fundamental purpose of crimes against humanity, which address the core crimes affecting humanity as a whole. Through comparative case studies and analysis of pertinent jurisprudence, the study examines the relevant jurisprudence and contextual factors where terrorist acts can be prosecuted as crimes against humanity. It provides a thorough analysis of the application of legal principles and the obstacles encountered in establishing the necessary elements for this classification. In addition, the study considers the potential ramifications of designating terrorism as a crime against humanity, including its impact on international cooperation, legal norms, and counterterrorism efforts. This study's findings contribute to the ongoing conversation regarding the classification of terrorism as a crime against humanity. By comparing and contrasting the characteristics of these two concepts, this paper sheds light on the complexities inherent in their legal classification. Description: LL.M.(Melit.) Mon, 01 Jan 2024 00:00:00 GMT /library/oar/handle/123456789/128698 2024-01-01T00:00:00Z /library/oar/handle/123456789/103636 Title: The legitimacy of military intervention for humanitarian purposes Abstract: Coming to a consensus about the current status of humanitarian intervention, is probably impossible task. Currently it is practiced both legally and illegally at the same time. I became interested in this subject due to the current situation and war in Syria, where the unilateral military interventions have been criticized, but also silently approved by many states. Further more, now and in the past, perpetrators of unilateral military intervention are rarely brought to justice. Therefore the question arises if the doctrine of humanitarian intervention in customary law been so infringed that it has become worthless? International community's and most significantly the United Nation's failure to stop the nearly 6 years of massacres in Syria has once again brought the concept of humanitarian intervention to the center of discussion. The UN Security Council was set up in the aftermath of WW2 to guarantee securing international peace for the future generations and to stop similar atrocities being repeated. The humanitarian crises in Syria as disastrous as it has been, has made some even conclude that the Security Council is now torn apart irreplaceably. Not only has the Security Council failed to adopt many of its draft resolutions because of vetoes, but four of the five permanent members of Security Council are themselves involved militarily in Syria in one way or the other. Political divisions over Syria have had tremendous consequences. The Security Council has visibly been unsuccessful fulfilling its basic function, which is the maintenance of international peace and security and also failed to uphold its Responsibility to Protect (R2P) the Syrian people. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) was a global commitment, which was endorsed by all member states of the UN in the 2005 World Summit. Its purpose was to commit to prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. The situation in Syria however, has drearily been called a "failure to protect". The persistent political divisions and failures to come close to any diplomatic and peaceful solutions or even a ceasefire, led to the resignation of Kofi Annan as UN-Arab League Joint Special Envoy for Syrian crises. Annan, a firm supporter of the R2P doctrine, and creator of six-point plan for peace in Syria, announced that he was resigning because of the failure and what he said had become a 'mission impossible'. Description: LL.M. Sun, 01 Jan 2017 00:00:00 GMT /library/oar/handle/123456789/103636 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z