Beyond Life and Limb: Exploring Incidental Mental Harm Under International Humanitarian Law

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

In recent years, much effort has been made, in different forums, to clarify some of international humanitarian law’s (IHL) vaguer standards. However, little attention has been given to the meaning of the concept of civilian harm. This chapter seeks to contribute to the understanding of harm by exploring, in a preliminary manner, an uncharted question: the issue incidental mental harm under the proportionality principle of jus in bello. The chapter asks first whether the inclusion of incidental mental harm in the proportionality calculus is a utopian suggestion, upsetting the delicate balance of IHL. It thereafter exemplifies IHL’s seeming blind-spot with regard to the issue, concluding that the lack of direct treatment of the concept does not amount to its negation. The chapter then critically explores possible challenges to the recognition of incidental mental harm, positing that these are not convincing. All in all, the chapter asserts that it is high time that states, commanders, judges and fact-finding missions take incidental mental harm seriously, if IHL is to maintain its integrity as a legal field setting out to minimize civilian harm.

Keywords

Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Armed Conflict Physical Harm Sonic Boom Emotional Harm 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Addison CG et al (1870) Wrongs and their remedies: being a treatise on the law of torts, 3rd edn. Banks and Brothers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambos K (2011) Judicial creativity at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon: is there a crime of terrorism under international law? Leiden J Int Law 24:655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Law Institute (1965) Restatement second, torts. American Law Institute, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  4. American Law Institute (2012) Restatement third, torts: liability for physical and emotional harm. American Law Institute, MNGoogle Scholar
  5. American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th edn. (DSM-5). American Psychiatric Publishing, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  6. Arnold R, Quénivet N (eds) (2008) International humanitarian law and human rights law: towards a new merger in international law. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  7. Askin KD (2003) Prosecuting wartime rape and other gender-related crimes under international law: extraordinary advances, enduring obstacles. Berkeley J Int Law 2:288Google Scholar
  8. Banks WC (2011) Toward an adaptive international humanitarian law: new norms for new battlefields. In: Banks WC (ed) New battlefields/old laws: critical debates on asymmetric warfare. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 1–22Google Scholar
  9. Barak A (2005) Purposive interpretation in law. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  10. Blum G (2011) On a differential law of war. Harv J Int Law 52:164Google Scholar
  11. Blum G (2013) The fog of victory. EJIL 24:391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brain C (2002) Advanced psychology: applications, issues and perspectives. Nelson Thornes, BoltonGoogle Scholar
  13. Cahn N (2005) Beyond retribution and impunity: responding to war crimes of sexual violence. Stanf J Civil Rights Civil Lib 1:217Google Scholar
  14. Charlson FJ et al (2012) Prediction the impact of the 2011 conflict in Libya on population mental health: PTSD and depression prevalence and mental health service requirements. PLoS ONE 7:1–11Google Scholar
  15. Desmond JM (2006) Mental and physical examinations in cases involving brain injuries and psychological injuries. Mass Law Rev 90:2Google Scholar
  16. Dinstein Y (2004) The conduct of hostilities under the international law of armed conflict, 1st edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. Dinstein Y (2010) The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. Dworkin RM (1986) Law’s empire. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Evans C (2012) The right to reparation in international law for victims of armed conflict. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Eytan A et al (2011) Mental and physical health of kosovar albanians in their place of origin: a post-war 6-year follow-up study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 46:953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ferraro T, ICRC (2012) Expert meeting: occupation and other forms of administration of foreign territory. ICRC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  22. Fuller LL (1969) The morality of law. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  23. Geiss R (2012) The principle of proportionality: “force protection” as a military advantage. Isr Law Rev 45:71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gelkopf M et al (2008) The mental health impact of terrorism in Israel: a repeat cross-sectional study of Arabs and Jews. Acta Psychiatr Scand 117:369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gorove S (1951) The problem of “mental harm” in the Genocide Convention. Wash Univ Law Q 1951:174Google Scholar
  26. Grey BJ (2011) Neuroscience and emotional harm in tort law: rethinking the American approach to free-standing emotional distress claims. Curr Leg Issues 13:203Google Scholar
  27. Hart HLA (2012) The concept of law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  28. Hakimi M (2012) A functional approach to targeting and detention. Mich Law Rev 110:1365Google Scholar
  29. Hays-Parks W (1990) Air war and the law of war. Air Force Law Rev 32:1Google Scholar
  30. Heller KJ (2011) The Nuremberg military tribunals and the origins of international criminal law. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Henckaerts JM and Doswald-Beck L, ICRC (2005) Customary international humanitarian law. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia (2009) ReportGoogle Scholar
  33. International Human Rights and Conflict Resolution Clinic, Stanford Law School and Global Justice Clinic, New York University School of Law (2012) Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in PakistanGoogle Scholar
  34. International Law Commission (2001) Draft Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with CommentariesGoogle Scholar
  35. Jessberger F (2009) The definition and the elements of the crime of genocide. In: Gaeta P (ed) The UN Genocide Convention: a commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 87–111Google Scholar
  36. Keane TM et al (2009) Post-traumatic stress disorder: definition, prevalence, and risk factors. In: Shiromany PJ et al (eds) Post-traumatic stress disorder: basic science and clinical practice. Humana Press, New York, pp 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Koh HH (1997) Why do nations obey international law? Yale Law J 106:2599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kolb R (2012) The main epochs of modern international law since 1864 and their related dominant legal constructions. In: Muzenović Larsen et al (eds) Searching for a “principle of humanity” in international humanitarian law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 23–71Google Scholar
  39. Lamp N (2011) Conceptions of war and paradigms of compliance: the “new war” challenge to international humanitarian law. J Confl Secur Law 1:225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Law Commission (1997) Liability for psychiatric illnessGoogle Scholar
  41. Lepsius O (2006) Human dignity and the downing of aircraft: the German federal constitutional court strikes down a prominent anti-terrorism provision in the new air-transport security act. Ger Law J 7:761Google Scholar
  42. Luban D (2011) Risk taking and force protection. Georgetown Public Law Research Paper No. 11-72Google Scholar
  43. Luban D, Shue H (2012) Mental torture: a critique of erasures in US law. Georget Law J 100:823Google Scholar
  44. Lubell N (2012) Human rights obligations in military occupation. Int Rev Red Cross 94:317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lumley MA et al (2011) Pain and emotion: a biopsychosocial review of recent research. J Clin Psychol 67:942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lykes MB, Mersky M (2006) Reparations and mental health: psychological interventions towards healing, human agency and rethreading social realities. In: De Greiff (ed) The handbook of reparations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 589–622Google Scholar
  47. McCormack T and Mtharu P (2006) Expected civilian damage and the proportionality equation. www.apcml.org/documents/un_report_exp_civilian_damage_1106.pdf. Accessed 2 June 2013
  48. Mcneal GS (2013) Kill-lists and accountability. Georget Law J (forthcoming), Available at SSRN: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1819583Google Scholar
  49. Melzer N, ICRC (2009) Interpretive guidance on the notion of direct participation in hostilities under international humanitarian law. ICRC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  50. Meron T (2000a) The Martens Clause, principles of humanity, and dictates of public conscience. Am J Int Law 94:78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Meron T (2000b) The humanization of humanitarian law. Am J Int Law 94:239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mulheron R (2012) Rewriting the requirement for a “recognized pyschiatric injury” in negligence claims. Oxf J Leg Stud 32:77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Muzenović Larsen K (2012) A “principle of humanity” or a “principle of human-rightism”? In: Muzenović Larsen et al (eds) Searching for a “principle of humanity” in international humanitarian law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 124–148Google Scholar
  54. Neria et al (2010) A longitudinal study of posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and generalized anxiety disorder in israeli civilians exposed to war trauma. J Trauma Stress 23:322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ohlin JD (2013) The duty to capture. Minn Law Rev 97:1268Google Scholar
  56. Perilla JL et al (2002) Ethnicity, culture and disaster response: identifying and explaining ethnic differences in PTSD six months after hurricane Andrew. J Soc Clin Psychol 21:20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Peterson AL et al (2008) Combat stress casualties in Iraq. Part 1: behavioral health consultation at an expeditionary medical group. Perspect Psychiatr Care 44:146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pictet JS (ed) (1958) Geneva Convention IV: commentary. ICRC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  59. Rabin RL (2006) Respecting boundaries and the economic loss rule in tort. Ariz Law Rev 48:857Google Scholar
  60. Richemond-Barak D (2011) Nonstate actors in armed conflicts: issues of distinction and reciprocity. In: Banks WC (ed) New battlefields/old laws: critical debates on asymmetric warfare. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 106–132Google Scholar
  61. Sandoz Y et al. (eds) (1987) Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  62. Sassòli M et al. (2011) How does law protect in war, vol I. ICRC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  63. Schmid AP (2011) Introduction. In: Schmid AP (ed) The Routledge handbook of terrorism research. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 1–37Google Scholar
  64. Schmitt MN (2004) “Direct participation in hostilities” and 21st century armed conflict. In: Fischer H et al (eds) Crisis management and humanitarian protection: Festschrift für Dieter Fleck. BWV, Berlin, pp 505–529Google Scholar
  65. Schmitt MN (2005) Precision attack and international humanitarian law. Int Rev Red Cross 87:445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Schmitt MN (2007) Asymmetrical warfare and international humanitarian law. In: Heintschel von Heinegg W, Epping V (eds) International humanitarian law facing new challenges: symposium in honour of Knut Ipsen. Springer, Berlin, pp 11–48Google Scholar
  67. Schmitt MN (2010) Military necessity and humanity in international humanitarian law: preserving the delicate balance. Va J Int Law 50:795Google Scholar
  68. Schmitt MN (ed) (2013) Tallinn Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare. International group of experts at the invitation of the Nato Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  69. Solis GD (2010) The law of armed conflict: international humanitarian law in war. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  70. Solomon S (2011) Occupied or not: the question of Gaza’s legal status after the Israeli disengagement. Cardozo J Int Comp Law 19:59Google Scholar
  71. Solomon S (2012) The recent European court of human rights judgment in the finogenov case: towards and esoteric humanization of warfare. Berkeley J Int Law PUBLICIST 11Google Scholar
  72. Steel Z et al (2009) Association of torture and other potentially traumatic events with mental health outcomes among populations exposed to mass conflict and displacement. JAMA 302:537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Thabet AA et al (2008) Exposure to war trauma and PTSD among parents and children in the Gaza strip. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 17:191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tirosh Y (2012) The right to be fat. Yale J Health Policy Law Eth 12:264Google Scholar
  75. UCDP/PRIO (2009) Armed conflict dataset. www.prio.no/Data/Armed-Conflict/UCDP-PRIO/Armed-Conflicts-Version-X-2009/. Accessed 2 June 2013
  76. US Army and Marine Corps (2006) Counterinsurgency field manualGoogle Scholar
  77. US Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (2009) Instruction: no-strike and the collateral damage estimation methodology. CJCSI 3160:01Google Scholar
  78. Vasterling J, Brewin CR (eds) (2005) Neuropsychology of PTSD: biological, cognitive, and clinical perspectives. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  79. Walzer M (2004) Arguing about war. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  80. Watkin K (2004) Controlling the use of force: a role for human rights norms in contemporary armed conflict. AJIL 98:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wertheimer M (2012) A brief history of psychology. Taylor and Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  82. Yaswi A, Haque A (2008) Prevalence of PTSD symptoms and depression and level of coping among the victims of the Kashmir conflict. J Loss Trauma 13:471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Zatzick F et al (2002) Predicting posttraumatic distress in hospitalized trauma survivors with acute injuries. Am J Psychiatry 159:941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Zegveld L (2011) The accountability of armed opposition groups in international law. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  85. Ziegler R, Otzari S (2012) Do soldiers’ lives matter? A view from proportionality. Isr Law Rev 45:53CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interdisciplinary Center HerzliyaHerzliyaIsrael

Personalised recommendations