la protección de bienes culturales en el tribunal penal internacional para la ex yugoslavia
Clicks: 254
ID: 145360
2012
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.3
/100
254 views
37 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #8 of 15 articles by views in journal of ecology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Since the outbreak of the Balkan war, three major events have taken place in what regards the protection of cultural property in armed conflict: the adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia which gives this court jurisdiction to try crimes against cultural and religious property; the approval of the Second Protocol to confirm and upgrade the obligations of the "1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict"; and, finally, the "2003 UNESCO Declaration concerning the Intentional Destruction of Cultural Heritage" motivated by the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan in 2001. While the latter two instruments have been exhaustively examined in scholarly literature, no updated study of the ICTY case-law exists yet. In this paper I go through all such cases and underline the following idea: the interpretation of ICTY has given rise to an involution and an evolution vis-à-vis the treaty law for the protection of cultural property in armed conflict; as well as to a doctrinal revolution by linking the destruction of cultural and religious property to the crimes of persecution and genocide. Since the interpretation of the ICTY largely diverges from the treatment afforded to cultural property in treaty law, I conclude that the protection of cultural property in armed conflict has by now a double life: one conventional and one jurisprudential
| Reference Key |
becerril2012revistala
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Marina Lostal Becerril |
| Journal | journal of ecology |
| Year | 2012 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.