IJ №1 (37) 2021
Content of the Martens’ clause

Abstract

The article is devoted to internal content of the Martens clause, which is an important social relations regulator. The practical relevance of this research is justified by existing armed conflicts, as well as by the fact that it fills the legal vacuum arising in situations that are unresolved with international treaties and customs. Moreover, the Martens clause is one of the links between international humanitarian law and international human rights law, which provides the necessary level of legal protection for all parties in armed conflicts. Accordingly, the regulatory role of the Martens clause is increasing which can be found in judicial practice. However, there was no examination of the relationship between morality and the Martens’ clause content. The main aim of this study is to identify the moral meaning and content of the principle of humanity and public consciousness, because the potential discrepancy of this provision may cause risks in the protection of rights of armed conflicts participants. Unclear content of the clause necessitates the application of externalist approaches to legal concepts. Application of ethical and philosophical methods makes it possible to disclose the correlation of moral laws and armed conflicts, understand the moral content of the requirements of public consciousness and the principles of humanity. Moral relativism and absolutism in relation to armed conflict are analyzed. Based on their correlation, the risks of moral self-elimination and leveling of morality are described as the problem of contradiction of absolute moral laws and the essence of armed conflict. To solve this problem an attempt is made to formulate a moral law which will combine the requirements of public consciousness and the principles of humanity. The conclusion of the study is that moral content of the requirements of public consciousness is in active actions dictated by the aim of getting long and just peace. The principles of humanity are reflected in the principle of limited universalization of the actions of participants in armed conflicts. This moral law contains a moral justification for the actions of a combatant, as well as a restriction of actions based on limited universalization.

About the author:
Daniil Sechin — BA Student (4th year), Law Institute, Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, Kaliningrad, Russia

Citation: Sechin D. (2021) Nravstvennoe soderzhanie ogovorki Martensa [Content of the Martens’ clause]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol.11, no.1, pp.164–182.

References

Apresyan R.G., Guseynov A.A. (eds.) (2000) Etika: uchebnik [Ethics: a textbook], Moscow: Gardariki. (In Russian).

Bogdanov O.V. (1978) Neytronnoe oruzhie i mezhdunarodnoe pravo [Neutron weapons and international law]. Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i pravo, no.12, pp.96–101. (In Russian).

Cassese A. (2000) The Martens Clause: Half a Loaf or Simply Pie in the Sky? European Journal of International Law, vol.11, no.1, pp.187–216.

Crawford E. (2006) The Modern Relevance of the Martens Clause. The Indian Society of International Law Yearbook of International Humanitarian and Refugee Law, vol.6, pp.1–18.

David E. (2011) Printsipy prava vooruzhennykh konfliktov: Kurs lektsiy, prochitannykh na yuridiche­skom fakul’tete Otkrytogo Bryussel’skogo universiteta [Principes de droit des conflits armés: Précis de la Faculté de droit de l’Université libre de Bruxelles], 2nd ed., Moscow: Mezhdunarodnyy Komitet Krasnogo Kresta. (In Russian).

Evans T.D. (2013) At War with the Robots: Autonomous Weapon Systems and the Martens Clause. Hofstra Law Review, vol.41, no.3, pp.697–733.

Giladi R. (2014) The Enactment of Irony: Reflections on the Origins of the Martens Clause. European Journal of International Law, vol.25, no.3, pp.847–869.

Il’in I.A. (1996) Osnovnoe nravstvennoe protivorechie voyny [The main moral contradiction of war]. In: Il’in I.A. Sobranie sochineniy. Tom 5 [Collection of essays. Vol.5], in 10 vols., Moscow: Rus­skaya kniga, pp.5–30. (In Russian).

Kalamkaryan R.A. (2006) Filosofiya mezhdunarodnogo prava [Philosophy of international law], Moscow: Nauka. (In Russian).

Kant I. (1994) Antropologiya s pragmaticheskoy tochki zreniya [Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view]. In: Kant I. Sochineniya. Tom 7 [Essays. Vol.7], in 8 vols., Moscow: Choro, 1994, pp.137–376. (In Russian).

Kant I. (1994) K vechnomy miru: filosofskiy proekt [Perpetual peace: a philosophical sketch]. In: Kant I. Sochineniya. Tom 7 [Essays. Vol.7], in 8 vols., Moscow: Choro, 1994, pp.5–56. (In Russian).

Kant I. (1994) Metafizika nravov [The metaphysics of morals]. In: Kant I. Sochineniya. Tom 6 [Essays. Vol.6], in 8 vols., Moscow: Choro, 1994, pp.224–543. (In Russian).

Meron T. (2000) The Martens Clause, Principles of Humanity, and Dictates of Public Conscience. American Journal of International Law, vol.94, no.1, pp.78–89.

Mun’os-Rokhas D., Frezar Zh.-Zh. (2004) Povedenie cheloveka na voyne: ponyat’ i predupredit’ narusheniya MGP [Human behavior in war: understand and prevent IHL violations]. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal Krasnogo Kresta, no.853, pp.69–88. (In Russian).

Payar K. (2003) Vozmozhen li vechnyy mir? Kant ili mirotvorcheskiy razum [Is eternal peace possible? Kant or the peacemaker’s mind]. Logos, vol.36, no.1, pp.10–19. (In Russian).

Pictet J. (1987) Commentary on the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.

Pustogarov V.V. (1999) The Martens Clause in International Law. Journal of the History of International Law, vol.1, no.2, pp.125–135.

Rawls J. (1995) Teoriya spravedlivosti [A theory of justice], V.V.Tselishchev, V.N.Karpovich, A.A.Shevchenko (transl.), Novosibirsk: Izdatel’stvo Novosibirskogo universiteta. (In Russian).

Razin V.A. (ed.) (2006) Etika: Uchebnik dlya vuzov [Ethics: A university textbook], 3rd ed., Moscow: Akademicheskiy proekt. (In Russian).

Rensmann T. (2008) Die Humanisierung des Völkerrechts durch das ius in bello: Von der Martens’schen Klausel zur “Responsibility to Protect”. Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht, vol.68, no.1, pp.111–128.

Rusinova V.N. (2017) Prava cheloveka v vooruzhennykh konfliktakh: problemy sootnosheniya norm mezhdunarodnogo gumanitarnogo prava i mezhdunarodnogo prava prav cheloveka: monografiya [Human rights in armed conflict: the relationship between international humanitarian law and international human rights law: a monograph], 2nd ed., Moscow: Statut. (In Russian).

Sassòli M., Bouvier A.A. (2009) Pravovaya zashchita vo vremya voyny [How does law protect in war?], Moscow: Mezhdunarodnyy Komitet Krasnogo Kresta. (In Russian).

Schäfer B. (2006) Zum Verhältnis Menschenrechte und humanitäres Völkerrecht: Zugleich ein Beitrag zur exterritorialen Geltung von Menschenrechtsverträgen, Potsdam: MenschenRechtsZentrum der Universität Potsdam.

Schircks R. (1999) Zum hundertjährigen Geburtstag der Martens’schen Klausel: eine Bestandsaufnahme. Humanitäres Völkerrecht Informationsschriften, vol.12, no.3, pp.167–169.

Sen A. (2016) Ideya spravedlivosti [The idea of justice], D.Kralechkin (transl.), Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Instituta Gaidara; Fond “Liberal’naya missiya”. (In Russian).

Smith T. (2019) Challenges in Identifying Binding Martens Clause Rules from the “Dictates of the Public Conscience” to Protect the Environment in Non-International Armed Conflict. Transnational Legal Theory, vol.10, no.2, pp.184–201.

Sparrow R. (2017) Ethics as a Source of Law: The Martens Clause and Autonomous Weapons. Available at: http://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2017/11/14/ethics-source-law-martens-clause-autonomous-weapons/ (accessed: 28.08.2020).

Stephens D. (2014) Behaviour in War: The Place of Law, Moral Inquiry and Self-Identity. International Review of the Red Cross, vol.96, no.895–896, pp.751–773.

Tanon E. (1904) Evolyutsiya prava i obshchestvennoe soznanie [Legal evolution and public consciousness], Saint Petersburg: Izdanie A.S.Suvorina. (In Russian).

Ticehurst R. (1997) The Martens Clause and the Laws of Armed Conflict. International Review of the Red Cross, vol.37, no.317, pp.125–134.

Uledov A.K. (1968) Struktura obshchestvennogo soznaniya: teoretiko-sotsiologicheskoe issledovanie [Structure of public consciousness: a theoretic and sociological research], Moscow: Mysl’. (In Russian).

Issue articles