A Bridge Too Far? Attacks against Cultural Property used as Military Objectives as War Crimes: The Prlić et al. case and the Mostar Bridge

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The destruction of the cultural property in conflict zones around the world has captured international attention on the need to prevent its destruction and prosecute those responsible. This article examines the current legal protection and international criminal framework on the criminalisation of the destruction of cultural property and in particular the exception to such destruction amounting to a war crime where they have become military objectives. This article discusses the recent decision in the Prlić et al case involving the Mostar bridge, in light of its being justified to be attacked as a military objective. This article argues that considerations of proportionality are still required in such circumstances. This is vital to minimise the cost to communities and peoples whose cultural identity is bound up with such cultural objects. The article also suggests that the perfidious use of cultural property by parties to a conflict should be criminalised.
Original languageEnglish
JournalInternational Criminal Law Review
Publication statusAccepted - 26 Jan 2020

Fingerprint

war crime
Military
legal protection
proportionality
criminalization
cultural identity
costs
community

Cite this

@article{c7e0eee690994af9861f351836a5a9cf,
title = "A Bridge Too Far? Attacks against Cultural Property used as Military Objectives as War Crimes: The Prlić et al. case and the Mostar Bridge",
abstract = "The destruction of the cultural property in conflict zones around the world has captured international attention on the need to prevent its destruction and prosecute those responsible. This article examines the current legal protection and international criminal framework on the criminalisation of the destruction of cultural property and in particular the exception to such destruction amounting to a war crime where they have become military objectives. This article discusses the recent decision in the Prlić et al case involving the Mostar bridge, in light of its being justified to be attacked as a military objective. This article argues that considerations of proportionality are still required in such circumstances. This is vital to minimise the cost to communities and peoples whose cultural identity is bound up with such cultural objects. The article also suggests that the perfidious use of cultural property by parties to a conflict should be criminalised.",
author = "Luke Moffett",
year = "2020",
month = "1",
day = "26",
language = "English",
journal = "International Criminal Law Review",
issn = "1567-536X",
publisher = "Martinus Nijhoff Publishers",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Bridge Too Far? Attacks against Cultural Property used as Military Objectives as War Crimes: The Prlić et al. case and the Mostar Bridge

AU - Moffett, Luke

PY - 2020/1/26

Y1 - 2020/1/26

N2 - The destruction of the cultural property in conflict zones around the world has captured international attention on the need to prevent its destruction and prosecute those responsible. This article examines the current legal protection and international criminal framework on the criminalisation of the destruction of cultural property and in particular the exception to such destruction amounting to a war crime where they have become military objectives. This article discusses the recent decision in the Prlić et al case involving the Mostar bridge, in light of its being justified to be attacked as a military objective. This article argues that considerations of proportionality are still required in such circumstances. This is vital to minimise the cost to communities and peoples whose cultural identity is bound up with such cultural objects. The article also suggests that the perfidious use of cultural property by parties to a conflict should be criminalised.

AB - The destruction of the cultural property in conflict zones around the world has captured international attention on the need to prevent its destruction and prosecute those responsible. This article examines the current legal protection and international criminal framework on the criminalisation of the destruction of cultural property and in particular the exception to such destruction amounting to a war crime where they have become military objectives. This article discusses the recent decision in the Prlić et al case involving the Mostar bridge, in light of its being justified to be attacked as a military objective. This article argues that considerations of proportionality are still required in such circumstances. This is vital to minimise the cost to communities and peoples whose cultural identity is bound up with such cultural objects. The article also suggests that the perfidious use of cultural property by parties to a conflict should be criminalised.

M3 - Article

JO - International Criminal Law Review

JF - International Criminal Law Review

SN - 1567-536X

ER -