28 Pages Posted: 3 Jul 2009
Date Written: June, 29 2009
Jus post bellum derives its name from two existing bodies of law: jus ad bellum and jus in bello, which are applicable, respectively, to the initiation of war and to conduct in war. In this article I assess whether the law of occupation is a workable point of departure for a jus post bellum. I then comment on what theory of peace informs jus post bellum, and I conclude with some suggestions on the scope and content of a jus post bellum, emphasizing the role of human rights, multilateralism, and economic reconstruction. In particular, I argue that jus post bellum should be based on the emerging norms of accountability, stewardship, good economic governance, and proportionality. Jus post bellum triggers principles in play in periods after armed conflict, moving away from war (ab bello) towards justice (ad jusitiam) and peace (ad pacem). Jus post bellum expands the traditional binary rules of international law into a tripartite system, which will bring the law into closer conformity with the challenges presented by the peace-making, peacebuilding, and post-conflict practices of today.
Keywords: jus post bellum, law of occupation, security council, human rights
JEL Classification: K33
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Boon, Kristen, Obligations of the New Occupier: The Contours of a Jus Post Bellum (June, 29 2009). Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review, Vol. 31, No. 2, 2008. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1427355