vaipan_g_v_disser

221

97.Bothe M. The Protection of the Civilian Population and NATO Bombing on Yugoslavia: Comments on a Report to the Prosecutor of the ICTY // European Journal of International Law. 2001. P. 531-535.

98.Bothe M., Partsch K.J., Solf W.A. New Rules for Victims of Armed Conflicts: Commentary on the Two 1977 Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. 2nd ed. Leiden; Boston. 2013.

99.Boyron S. Proportionality in English Administrative Law: A Faulty Translation? // Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 1992. P. 237-264.

100.Brown B.L. The Proportionality Principle in the Humanitarian Law of Warfare: Recent Efforts at Codification // Cornell International Law Journal. 1976-1977.

P.134-155.

101.Brownlie I. International Law and the Use of Force by States. Oxford, 1963.

102.Cannizzaro E. Il Principio della Proporzionalità nell'ordinamento

Internazionale. Milano, 2000.

103.Cannizzaro E. The Role of Proportionality in the Law of International Countermeasures // European Journal of International Law. 2001. P. 889-916.

104.Cannizzaro E. Contextualizing Proportionality: Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello in the Lebanese War // International Review of the Red Cross. 2006. P.-779-792.

105.Cannizzaro E. Proportionality in the Law of Armed Conflict // The Oxford Handbook of International Law in Armed Conflict / Ed. by A. Clapham, P. Gaeta. Oxford, 2014. P. 332-352.

106.Christoffersen J. Fair Balance: Proportionality, Subsidiarity and Primarity in the European Convention on Human Rights. Leiden; Boston, 2009.

107.Cohen-Eliya M., Porat I. American Balancing and German Proportionality: The Historical Origins // International Journal of Constitutional Law. 2010.

P.263-286.

108.Cohen-Eliya M., Porat I. Proportionality and the Culture of Justification // American Journal of Comparative Law. 2011. P. 463.

222

109.Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 / Ed. by Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski, B. Zimmermann. Geneva, 1987.

110.Crawford E. Proportionality // Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public

L. Doswald-Beck. Vol I. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2005.

112.Customary International Humanitarian Law / Ed. By J.-M. Henckaerts,

L.Doswald-Beck. Vol II. Part 1. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2005.

113.Damrosch L.F. Retaliation or Arbitration – or Both? The 1978 United StatesFrance Aviation Dispute // American Journal of International Law. 1980. P. 785-807.

114.de Búrca G. The Principle of Proportionality and its Application in EC Law // Yearbook of European Law. 1993. P. 105-150.

115.Doswald-Beck L. The Value of the 1977 Geneva Protocols for the Protection of Civilians // Armed Conflict and the New Law: Aspects of the 1977 Geneva Protocols and the 1981 Weapons Convention / Ed. by M. Meyer. L., 1989.

P.137-172.

116.Dworkin R. Taking Rights Seriously. Cambridge (MA), 1977.

117.Eissen M.A. The Principle of Proportionality in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights // The European System for the Protection of Human Rights / Ed. by R. St. J. Macdonald, F. Matscher & H. Petzold. Dordrecht; Boston, 1993. P. 125-146.

118.Elagab O.Y. The Place of Non-Forcible Counter-Measures in Contemporary International Law // The Reality of International Law: Essays in Honour of Ian Brownlie / Ed. by G.S. Goodwin-Gill, S. Talmon. Oxford; N.Y., 1999.

223

119.Estreicher S. Privileging Asymmetric Warfare (Part II)?: The “Proportionality”

Principle under International Humanitarian Law // Chicago Journal of International Law. 2011-2012. P. 143-157.

120.Falk R. The Status of Law in International Society. Princeton, 1970.

121.Farer T.J. The Laws of War 25 Years After Nuremberg // International Conciliation. 1970-1972.

122.Fenrick W.J. Attacking the Enemy Civilian as a Punishable Offense // Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law. 1996-1997. P. 536-569.

123.Fenrick W.J. Targeting and Proportionality during the NATO Bombing Campaign against Yugoslavia // European Journal of International Law. 2001.

P.489-502.

124.Fish S. There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It’s a Good Thing, Too // There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech and It’s a Good Thing, Too. N.Y.;

Oxford, 1994. P. 102-119.

125.Franck T.M. On Proportionality of Countermeasures in International Law // American Journal of International Law. 2008. P. 715-767.

126.Franck T.M. Proportionality in International Law // Law & Ethics of Human Rights. 2010. P. 231-242.

127.Gardam J. The Contribution of the International Court of Justice to International Humanitarian Law // Leiden Journal of International Law. 2001.

P.349-365.

128.Gardam J. Necessity, Proportionality and the Use of Force by States. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2004.

129.Golder B. Theorizing Human Rights // The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law / Ed. by A. Orford, F. Hoffman. Oxford, 2016. P. 684-700.

130.Greer S. The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements, Problems, and Prospects. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2006.

131.Grey T.C. Freestanding Legal Pragmatism // Cardozo Law Review. 1996.

P.21-42.

224

132.Habermas J. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge (MA), 1996.

133.Habermas J. Reply to Symposium Participants, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law // Cardozo Law Review. 1996. P. 1477-1557.

134.Hall W.E. A Treatise on International Law. Oxford, 1895.

135.Hall W.E. A Treatise on International Law. 8th ed. Oxford, 1924.

136.Hampson F.J. Proportionality and Necessity in the Gulf Conflict // American Society of International Law. Proceedings of the 86th Annual Meeting. Washington, 1992.

137.Hart H.L.A. The Concept of Law. Oxford, 1961.

138.Higgins R. Problems and Process: International Law and How We Use It. N.Y.; Oxford, 1994.

139.International Committee of the Red Cross. Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law. Geneva, 2009.

140.Jackson V.C. Constitutional Law in an Age of Proportionality // Yale Law Journal. 2015. P. 3094-3196.

141.Jütersonke O. Morgenthau, Law and Realism. N.Y., 2010.

142.Kalshoven F. Implementing Limitations on the Use of Force: Proportionality and Necessity // American Society of International Law. Proceedings of the 86th Annual Meeting. Washington, 1992.

143.Kammerhofer J. International Legal Positivism // The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law / Ed. by A. Orford, F. Hoffman. Oxford, 2016. P. 407-426.

144.Kelsen H. Principles of International Law. N.Y., 1952.

145.Kennedy, David. Primitive Legal Scholarship // Harvard International Law Journal. 1986. P. 1-98.

146.Kennedy, David. International Law in the Nineteenth Century: History of an Illusion // Nordic Journal of International Law. 1996. P. 385-420.

225

147.Kennedy, David. The “Rule of Law,” Political Choices, and Development

Common Sense // D.M. Trubek, A. Santos. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2006. P. 95-173.

148.Kennedy, David, Fisher III W.W. Introduction // The Canon of American Legal Thought / Ed. by D. Kennedy, W.W. Fisher III. Princeton, Oxford, 2006.

P.1-16.

149.Kennedy, David. Lawfare and Warfare // The Cambridge Companion to International Law / Ed. by J. Crawford, M. Koskenniemi. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2012. P. 158-184.

150.Kennedy, Duncan. A Semiotics of Legal Argument // Collected Courses of the Academy of European Law. 1994. Vol. III. Book 2. P. 309-365.

151.Kennedy, Duncan. A Critique of Adjudication (Fin de Siècle). Cambridge (MA), 1997.

152.Kennedy, Duncan. The Disenchantment of Logically Formal Legal Rationality, or Max Weber’s Sociology in the Genealogy of the Contemporary Mode of

Western Legal Thought // Hastings Law Journal. 2003–2004. P. 1031-1076.

153.Kennedy, Duncan. Three Globalizations of Law and Legal Thought: 1850-2000 // The New Law and Development: A Critical Appraisal / Ed. by D.M. Trubek,

A.Santos. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2006. P. 19-73.

154.Kennedy, Duncan. A Left Phenomenological Alternative to the Hart/Kelsen Theory of Legal Interpretation // Kennedy, Duncan. Legal Reasoning. Collected Essays. Aurora, 2008. P. 153-173.

155.Kennedy, Duncan. A Transnational Genealogy of Proportionality in Private Law // The Foundations of European Private Law / Ed. by R. Brownsword, H.-W. Micklitz, L. Niglia. Oxford; Portland, 2011. P. 185-220.

156.Kingsbury B., Schill S. Investor-State Arbitration as Governance: Fair and Equitable Treatment, Proportionality, and the Emerging Global Administrative Law // 50 Years of the New York Convention / Ed. by A.J. van Den Berg. Alphen aan den Rijn, 2009. P. 5-68.

226

157.Klatt M., Meister M. Proportionality – A Benefit to Human Rights? Remarks on the I.CON Controversy // International Journal of Constitutional Law. 2012. P. 687-708.

158.Koskenniemi M. The Effect of Rights on Political Culture // The European Union and Human Rights / Ed. by P. Alston. N.Y., 1999. P. 99-116.

159.Koskenniemi M. Letter to the Editors of the Symposium // American Journal of International Law. 1999. P. 351-361.

160.Koskenniemi M. The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law, 1870–1960. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2002.

161.Koskenniemi M. From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument. 2nd ed. N.Y.; Cambridge, 2005.

162.Koskenniemi M. Occupied Zone – “A Zone of Reasonableness?” // Israel Law

Review. 2008. P. 13-40.

163.Koskenniemi M. Human Rights Mainstreaming as a Strategy for Institutional Power // Humanity: An International Journal of Human Rights, Humanitarianism, and Development. 2010. Vol. 1(1). P. 47-58.

164.Koskenniemi M. The Function of Law in the International Community: Introduction // Lauterpacht H. The Function of Law in the International Community. Oxford, 2011. P. xxix-xlvii.

165.Koskenniemi M. What is Critical Research in International Law? Celebrating Structuralism // Leiden Journal of International Law. 2016. P. 727-735.

166.Koskenniemi M. History of International Law, World War I to World War II // Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. URL: http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law- 9780199231690-e715.

167.Koskenniemi M., Leino P. Fragmentation of International Law? Postmodern Anxieties // Leiden Journal of International Law. 2002. P. 553-579.

168.Kretzmer D. The Inherent Right to Self-Defence and Proportionality in Jus Ad Bellum // European Journal of International Law. 2013. P. 235-282.

227

169.Kumm M. Constitutional Rights as Principles: On the Structure and Domain of Constitutional Justice // International Journal of Constitutional Law. 2004. Vol. 2(3). P. 574-596.

170.Kumm M. The Idea of Socratic Contestation and the Right to Justification: The Point of Rights-Based Proportionality Review // Law & Ethics of Human Rights. 2010. P. 142-175.

171.Lachenmann F. Legal Positivism // Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law. URL: opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law- 9780199231690-e1856.

172.Lauterpacht H. The Function of Law in the International Community. Oxford, 1933. P. 80.

173.Lauterpacht H. “Resort to War” and the Interpretation of the Covenant during the Manchurian Dispute // American Journal of International Law. 1934. P. 43-60.

174.Lauterpacht H. General Rules of the Law of Peace // International Law, Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht / Ed. by Elihu Lauterpacht. Vol. 1. Cambridge, 1970 [1937]. P. 179-444.

175.Lauterpacht H. Sovereignty over Submarine Areas // British Yearbook of International Law. 1950. P. 376-433.

176.Lauterpacht H. The Problem of the Revision of the Law of War // British Yearbook of International Law. 1952. P. 360-382.

177.Lauterpacht H. On Realism, Especially in International Relations // International Law, Being the Collected Papers of Hersch Lauterpacht / Ed. by Elihu Lauterpacht. Vol. 2. Cambridge, 1975 [1953]. P. 52-66.

178.Lauterpacht H. The Development of International Law by the International Court. L., 1958.

179.Legg A. The Margin of Appreciation in International Human Rights Law: Deference and Proportionality. Oxford, 2012.

228

180.Letsas G. Two Concepts of the Margin of Appreciation // Oxford Journal of Legal Studies. 2006. P. 705-732.

181.Letsas G. A Theory of Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford; N.Y., 2007.

182.Luteran M. Towards Proportionality as a Proportion Between Means and Ends

// Law and Outsiders: Norms, Processes and “Othering” in the 21st Century /

Ed. by C.C. Murphy, P. Green. Oxford; Portland, 2011. P. 3-22.

183.Luteran M. The Lost Meaning of Proportionality // Proportionality and the Rule of Law: Rights, Justification, Reasoning / ed. by G. Huscroft, B.W. Miller, G. Webber. N.Y., 2014. P. 21-42.

184.Marks S. The European Convention on Human Rights and its “Democratic Society” // British Yearbook of International Law. 1995. P. 209-238.

185.Mathews J., Stone Sweet A. Proportionality Balancing and Global Constitutionalism // Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. 2008. P. 72-164.

186.Max Weber on Law in Economy and Society / Ed. by M. Rheinstein. Cambridge (MA), 1954 [1925].

187.Mälksoo L. Russian Approaches to International Law. Oxford, 2015.

188.McBride J. Proportionality and the European Convention on Human Rights // The Principle of Proportionality in the Laws of Europe / Ed. by E. Ellis. Oxford, 1999. P. 23-35.

189.McDougal M., Feliciano F. Law and Minimum World Public Order. New Haven, 1961.

190.McHarg A. Reconciling Human Rights and the Public Interest: Conceptual Problems and Doctrinal Uncertainty in the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights // The Modern Law Review. Vol. 62(5). 1999. P. 671-696.

191.Melzer N. Targeted Killing in International Law. Oxford, 2010.

192.Meron T. The Humanization of Humanitarian Law // American Journal of International Law. 2000. P. 239-278.

229

193.Möller K. Balancing and the Structure of Constitutional Rights // International Journal of Constitutional Law. 2007. Vol. 5(3). P. 453-468.

194.Möller K. The Global Model of Constitutional Rights. Oxford, 2012.

195.Morgenthau H. Positivism, Functionalism, and International Law // American Journal of International Law. 1940. P. 260-284.

196.Morgenthau H. Scientific Man vs. Power Politics. Chicago, 1946.

197.Morgenthau H. Politics among Nations: the Struggle for Power and Peace. N.Y., 1948.

198.Morgenthau H. Another “Great Debate”: The National Interest of the United States // American Political Science Review. 1952. P. 961-988.

199.Newton M., May L. Proportionality in International Law. N.Y., 2014.

200.Nolte G. Thin or Thick? The Principle of Proportionality and International Humanitarian Law // Law & Ethics of Human Rights. 2010. P. 243-255.

201.Nolte G. Multipurpose Self-Defence, Proportionality Disoriented: A Response to David Kretzmer // European Journal of International Law. 2013. P. 283-290.

202.O’Connell M.E. Historical Development and Legal Basis // The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law / Ed. by D. Fleck. 3rd ed. Oxford, 2013.

203.O’Donovan O. The Just War Revisited. Cambridge, 2003.

204.O’Keefe R. Proportionality // The Law of International Responsibility / Ed. by J. Crawford, A. Pellet, S. Olleson. N.Y., 2010. P. 1157-1168.

205.Oeter S. Methods and Means of Combat // The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law / Ed. by D. Fleck. 3rd ed. Oxford, 2013.

206.Oppenheim L. International Law. Vol. II. 2nd ed. L.; N.Y., 1912.

207.Oppenheim L. International Law. Vol. II. 3rd ed. L.; N.Y., 1921.

208.Oppenheim L. International Law. Vol. II. 7th ed. / Ed. by H. Lauterpacht. N.Y., 1948.

209.Orakhelashvili A. The Impact of Peremptory Norms on the Interpretation and Application of United Nations Security Council Resolutions // European Journal of International Law. 2005. P. 59-88.

230

210.Pavlakos G. Constitutional Rights, Balancing and the Structure of Autonomy

//Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence. Vol. 24(1). 2011. P.129-153.

211.Pictet J. Development and Principles of International Humanitarian Law. The Hague; Geneva, 1985.

212.Pound R. Mechanical Jurisprudence // Columbia Law Review. 1908. P. 605-623.

213.Rao N. On the Use and Abuse of Dignity in Constitutional Law // Columbia Journal of European Law. 2008. P. 201-256.

214.Rivers J. Proportionality and Variable Intensity of Review // Cambridge Law Journal. 2006. P. 174-207.

215.Roberts A. Is International Law International? Oxford; N.Y., 2017.

216.Rogers A.P.V. “Zero-Casualty Warfare” // International Review of the Red

Cross. 2000. P. 165-181.

217.Rogers A.P.V. Law on the Battlefield. 2nd ed. Manchester, 2004.

218.Scalia A. The Rule of Law as a Law of Rules // The University of Chicago Law Review. 1989. P. 1175-1188.

219.Schachter O. Dag Hammarskjold and the Relation of Law to Politics // American Journal of International Law. 1962. P. 1-8.

220.Schachter O. International Law in Theory and Practice // Collected Courses of the Hague Academy of International Law. Vol. 178. 1982.

221.Schauer F. A Comment on the Structure of Rights // Georgia Law Review. 1993. P. 415-434.

222.Schauer F. Balancing, Subsumption, and the Constraining Role of Legal Text

//Institutionalized Reason: The Jurisprudence of Robert Alexy / Ed. by M. Klatt. Oxford, 2012. P. 307-316.

223.Schmitt M.N. Fault Lines in the Law of Attack // Testing the Boundaries of International Humanitarian Law / Ed. by S.C. Breau, Agnieszka Jachec-Neale. L., 2006. P. 277-307.