Combat immunity and NATO standards: legal aspects of adapting Ukrainian legislation
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The article presents a comprehensive analysis of the implementation of the combat immunity institution in Ukraine in the context of legal adaptation to NATO standards and increasing the efficiency of the defense sector under ongoing military aggression. The author justifies the relevance of the research by highlighting the need to harmonize national legislation with international humanitarian norms, ensure compatibility with the military management systems of NATO member countries, and guarantee legal protection for military personnel and civilians. The current state of regulatory provisions for combat immunity is examined, distinguishing issues such as the lack of a clear definition, uncertainty regarding the range of subjects, procedural shortcomings in documenting combat decisions, and insufficient training of command staff in international humanitarian law. Significant attention is given to the analysis of NATO countries’ experience – specifically the USA, United Kingdom, Canada, France, and Germany – where combat immunity operates either through case law or codified statutes, is applied within strict boundaries, and is never extended to war crimes, with its realization supported by oversight mechanisms and adherence to the principle of proportionality. The comparative analysis demonstrates different legal models: from the American approach shaped by jurisprudence and balancing military necessity with human rights protection, to the British “combat immunity” doctrine in civil law which limits tort liability for combat operations but does not provide immunity for systemic negligence. Separate consideration is given to the legal practices of France, Canada, and Germany, where immunity is regulated by military codes and executive documents (Rules of Engagement), which impose severe sanctions for violations of international humanitarian law. Using the example of Ukrainian judicial practice, particularly the Supreme Court decision in the case of General V. Nazarov, the development of the concept and its application within armed conflict is illustrated. The author emphasizes the necessity of legislative unification of norms, legal specification of immunity boundaries, distinction between criminal and civil liability, establishment of standardized mechanisms for recording combat decisions, and systematic training of military personnel and judges. The author proposes a comprehensive model of combat immunity that integrates adapted NATO practices and Ukrainian realities, enabling effective protection for participants in defense operations, preventing impunity for offences, and strengthening the legal foundations of national security. The conclusions highlight that the successful implementation of combat immunity depends on the combination of legislative reform, procedural standards, and educational components, which together will ensure greater defense capability and legal resilience of the state in wartime challenges.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle