ALMA is proud to present a new article - "The Legal Paradox of International Chemical Riot Control Regulations" by Katja Knoechelmann:
"This paper deals with the legal paradox that arises in international riot control regulations. While it is permitted to use chemical riot control agents in times of peace, it is mostly prohibited during times of armed conflict. This, the author believes, runs contrary to the logic that armed conflict situations classify as emergency situations in which certain rights and comforts of the population may be suspended temporarily. Several case studies are given to explain different countries acting in this legal paradox. Three explanations are proposed for the existence of such a paradox:
(1) the slippery slope argument that the introduction of chemical riot control agents on the battlefield could result in easy use of other chemicals on the battlefield, namely chemical weapons;
(2) the sanctity of national sovereignty and the lack of regulation in the human rights law paradigm; and
(3) that the main and initial purpose of chemical riot control lies in controlling the civilian population during times of riot, therefore mainly illuminating its purpose during armed conflict which focuses on controlling actions of enemy combatants and granting protection to the civilian population, rather than making it the object of focus."
Students, scholars and practitioners who wish to submit IHL related op-eds and papers, please contact email@example.com