![]() ![]() ![]() On 20 June 2019, the verdict of the Court of Appeal in London accepted one of the grounds put forward by the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) against the British Government. In addition, civil society organizations in several EU member states-including Italy and the UK-have responded by questioning the legality of these exports vis-à-vis agreed regional and international standards, and by challenging them in court. In Italy and the United Kingdom, parliamentarians have responded by tabling motions and publishing reports aimed at pressuring their governments to change or reassess their decision-making processes. While some EU states have halted or restricted exports of military equipment to the Saudi Arabian-led coalition actively engaged in the conflict-due to IHL and concerns over human rights-others have continued with supplies. These differences have become particularly evident in the escalation of the conflict in Yemen. However, there have always been differences in the way EU member states have interpreted these rules, depending on their national laws, decision-making processes and political and economic interests. ![]() ![]() These standards are grounded in-among other things-the application of international humanitarian law (IHL). European Union (EU) member states have committed themselves to a set of rules, agreed both at the regional and international level, which are meant to prevent and address the diverse effects of unregulated or poorly regulated arms trade on conflict, regional security and stability and, ultimately, human suffering. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |