Belgium and Brazil Explanations of Vote on Protocol II Case Study
Order ID: 89JHGSJE83839 Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages: 5-10 Instructions:
Belgium and Brazil Explanations of Vote on Protocol II Case Study
a. In which situations does Art. 3 common to the Geneva Conventions apply? When does Protocol II become applicable?
(P II, Art. 1) Is its field of application the same as common Art. 3?
b. Is Belgiums explanation concerning the field of application of common Art. 3 correct? If it was not explicitly
reaffirmed, why is Belgium so sure?
c. Which aspects of common Art. 3 were neither developed nor reaffirmed by Protocol II? Can you imagine why? Are
those parts of common Art. 3 still valid? Or have they become obsolete?
d. What does Belgium mean when it states that the right of the ICRC to offer its services is equally applicable to both
sides in a non-international armed conflict? May the ICRC offer its services to only one side? If only one side accepts its
services, may the ICRC deploy its activities only on that side? Even if it is the rebel side?
2.
a. Who normally determines whether an international treaty is applicable to a State Party? A judge? The State Party
concerned?
b. Who determines the applicability of Protocol II? Do you agree with Brazil that only the government of the State onwhose territory the conflict is allegedly taking place may recognize the applicability of Protocol II? Which concerns does
such a manner of recognition raise? Does such a manner of recognition exist for the four Conventions or Protocol I? And
more specifically for common Art. 3? Why would States find common Art. 3 and Protocol II to be more problematic?
c. If the decision were again left to the government alone, would this not undermine much of the purpose of Art. 1 of
Protocol II, which is to define the elements of armed conflict in such a way that authorities can no longer deny the
existence of a conflict?
3. Is Protocol II based on the principle of equality of the parties to the conflict, thus imposing the same duties and granting the same rights on both sides?
4. Does the applicability or application of the IHL of non-international armed conflicts have any effect on the legal status
of the parties to the conflict? Has the application of either common Art. 3 or Protocol II been used for the purpose of
claiming recognition?
Belgium and Brazil Explanations of Vote on Protocol II Case Study
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Belgium and Brazil Explanations of Vote on Protocol II Case Study
Belgium and Brazil Explanations of Vote on Protocol II Case Study