754:, the death of civilians during an armed conflict, no matter how grave and regrettable, does not in itself constitute a war crime. International humanitarian law and the Rome Statute permit belligerents to carry out proportionate attacks against military objectives, even when it is known that some civilian deaths or injuries will occur. A crime occurs if there is an intentional attack directed against civilians (principle of distinction) (Article 8(2)(b)(i)) or an attack is launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality) (Article 8(2)(b)(iv)).
644:
is used to defend against non-deadly force, the harm inflicted by the actor (death or serious bodily harm) will be greater than the harm avoided (less than serious bodily harm). Even if deadly force is proportionate, its use must be necessary. Otherwise, unlawful conduct will only be justified when
759:
Intentionally launching an attack in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects or widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment which would be clearly excessive in relation to the concrete and direct
548:
While the
European Union has placed a consistent focus on the proportionality test in the context of policy issues, namely human rights, the proportionality test in the Australian context is a matter of constitutional interpretation with respect to legislative power under the Constitution. Unlike
1159:
provides a widely accepted definition of military objective: "In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or
700:
Proportionality is also present in other areas of municipal law in the United States, such as civil procedure. For example, it is embodied in Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(b)(2)(C), which considers whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit. Proportionality is a key
645:
it involves the lesser harm of two harmful choices. If countering with non-deadly force or with no force at all avoids the threatened harm, defensive use of deadly force is no longer the lesser evil of only two choices. Alternatives involving still less societal harm are available.
701:
consideration in the discovery process, and has been applied to e-discovery, where it has been attributed with significant cost-savings. It is likely that proportionality will be applied to new and developing areas of law, such as the law of legal technology.
564:
made clear that 'the question is essentially one of connexion, not appropriateness of proportionality, and where a sufficient connexion is established, it is not for the Court to judge whether the law is inappropriate or disproportionate'.
443:), which took its existence for granted and transferred it to the field of constitutional law. In particular, it required statutes limiting fundamental rights and acts resting on such statutes to also satisfy the proportionality test.
682:. The fundamental principle behind proportionality is that the punishment should fit the crime. In 1983, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that courts must do three things to decide whether a sentence is proportional to a specific crime:
577:
is used to describe the idea that the punishment of a certain crime should be in proportion to the severity of the crime itself. In practice, systems of law differ greatly on the application of this principle. The principle of
352:
processes, especially in constitutional law, as a logical method intended to assist in discerning the correct balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited
433:(appeals court of general administrative jurisdiction), to reign in the discretion to act granted to the police by statute. The proportionality test was later popularized by its application in the jurisprudence of the
1255:
633:, (an eye for an eye). In others, it has led to a more restrictive manner of sentencing: for example, all European Union countries have accepted as a treaty obligation that no crime warrants the
739:
1264:
152:
496:
1341:
679:
720:
must be proportional and not "excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated" by an attack on a military objective.
1103:"Rule 26. Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure | LII / Legal Information Institute"
400:
must be "proportionately and reasonably incurred", or "proportionate and reasonable in amount", if they are to form part of a court ruling on costs.
926:
727:
328:
17:
742:. He published an open letter containing his findings; in a section titled "Allegations concerning War Crimes", he elucidates this use of
550:
1125:
1365:
512:
897:, 12. ed. (Munich: C.H. Beck, 2022), § 1, at margin note 12, further court decisions of importance were PrOVGE (Berlin: Heymanns.
865:
1396:
640:
In self-defense cases, the amount of force employed by the defender must be proportionate to the threatened aggressive force. If
434:
549:
Europe, the proportionality test as a means to characterize whether
Commonwealth legislation falls under a head of power under
1295:
Luebbe-Wolff, Gertrude (2014), "The
Principle of Proportionality in the Case-Law of the German Federal Constitutional Court",
1275:
Shamash, Hamutal Esther (2005–2006), "How Much is Too Much? An
Examination of the Principle of Jus in Bello Proportionality",
1386:
861:
922:
836:
533:
525:
494:, depending on the margin of discretion that the Court sees as being afforded to the member state. Examples are found in
1180:
1080:
627:. The idea in practice became a cruel and ineffective corrective. In some systems, proportionality was interpreted as
886:
246:
822:
321:
258:
241:
31:
236:
529:
364:
281:
226:
457:
In
European Union law there are generally acknowledged to be four stages to a proportionality test, namely,
807:
731:
675:
500:, where the ECJ points out that a member state has some discretion in the policies it pursues, surrounding
286:
1401:
653:
314:
276:
231:
200:
1391:
1015:
561:
906:
693:; i.e., whether more serious crimes are subject to the same penalty or to less serious penalties, and
596:
491:
998:
1035:
817:
649:
349:
251:
1160:
neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage", (
1067:
1039:
812:
360:, the concept is used to convey the idea that the punishment of an offender should fit the crime.
472:
to achieve the aim (potentially with a requirement of evidence to show it will have that effect)
537:
532:
used for scrutinizing actions adopted by national authorities which restricts rights under the
490:
It is, however, often seen that the third and fourth criteria are often merged into one by the
162:
157:
66:
1357:
1325:
977:
1288:
985:
554:
424:
393:
206:
61:
909:(at p. 427–428); E 38 (1901), 421 (at p. 421 and pp. 426–427); E 51 (1908), 284 (at p. 288).
1369:
1055:
1031:
970:"The European Court of Human Rights on the Principle of Proportionality in 'Russian' Cases"
574:
56:
8:
1059:
940:
624:
344:
is a general principle in law which covers several separate (although related) concepts:
182:
112:
1251:
1237:
1156:
793:
767:
762:
Article 8(2)(b)(iv) draws on the principles in
Article 51(5)(b) of the 1977 Additional
723:
452:
386:
302:
167:
42:
930:
696:
Compare the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions.
1353:
1313:
1284:
1229:
973:
898:
882:
710:
658:
504:, in reducing unemployment. Further examples of the proportionality test are seen in
381:
1221:
670:
501:
194:
86:
1203:
1102:
842:
591:
420:
A concept of proportionality that was testable in law was first developed in the
348:
The concept of proportionality is used as a criterion of fairness and justice in
172:
143:
76:
686:
Compare the nature and gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty,
616:
605:
506:
410:
372:
71:
656:
proposed the
Proportionality Doctrine in three cases during the 1980s, namely
1380:
1233:
664:
634:
587:
99:
81:
969:
902:
751:
690:
641:
629:
357:
118:
1225:
828:
609:
583:
579:
479:
to achieve the aim, that there cannot be any less onerous way of doing it
397:
368:
177:
132:
557:
has remarked that the 'test has not enjoyed universal favour'. However,
1241:
1152:
776:
763:
620:
558:
126:
92:
1208:
1209:"Proportionality in Canadian and German Constitutional Jurisprudence"
735:
713:
623:
in which prisoners would simply be watched, rather than subjected to
674:(1987), to clarify this key principle of proportionality within the
717:
601:
106:
486:, considering the competing interests of different groups at hand
421:
1189:, pp. 4–5. See section "Allegations concerning War Crimes".
404:
1126:"Proportionality Doctrine Reduces E-Discovery Costs and Abuses"
954:
788:(c) and whether (a) was "clearly excessive" in relation to (b).
30:
This article is about the legal principle. For other uses, see
774:" excessive. The application of Article 8(2)(b)(iv) requires,
689:
Compare the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same
770:, but restricts the criminal prohibition to cases that are "
528:, proportionality is one of main principles utilised by the
1342:"The History of the General Principle of Proportionality"
1168:
637:, whereas some other countries in the world do use it.
519:
1306:
Proportionality in Crime
Control and Criminal Justice
1145:
1143:
497:
R (Seymour-Smith) v
Secretary of State for Employment
893:, p. 385. According to T. Kingreen/R. Poscher,
582:
is an absolute standard from which the 17th century
1207:
1140:
1368:. Crimes of War Education Project. Archived from
704:
1378:
1061:
553:, has attracted divergent viewpoints, in which
427:in the late 19th century, notably the Prussian
1263:, International Criminal Court, archived from
782:(a) the anticipated civilian damage or injury;
1250:
1186:
1161:
750:Under international humanitarian law and the
405:Proportionality as a general principle in law
322:
1294:
1274:
1174:
934:
438:
428:
1220:(2). University of Toronto Press: 383–397.
590:even for minor crimes. In the 18th century
551:section 51 of the Constitution of Australia
329:
315:
968:Dolzhikov, Alexey V. (December 9, 2011).
967:
1304:Billis, Emmanouil et al. (eds.) (2021),
586:of England emerged, which specified the
1363:
1123:
784:(b) the anticipated military advantage;
760:overall military advantage anticipated;
435:Federal Constitutional Court of Germany
14:
1379:
1303:
868:, rule 44.4, accessed 14 November 2022
1339:
1202:
918:
890:
879:Der Grundsatz der Verhältnismäßigkeit
513:Kücükdeveci v Swedex GmbH & Co KG
446:
923:German Federal Constitutional Court
837:Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State
526:European Convention on Human Rights
520:European Convention on Human Rights
385:are important factors in assessing
24:
1124:Kozubek, Michael (March 1, 2011).
1005:
866:Part 44: General Rules about Costs
573:In criminal law, the principle of
27:Several distinct principles of law
25:
1413:
1333:
1214:University of Toronto Law Journal
757:Article 8(2)(b)(iv) criminalizes:
1277:Israel Defense Forces Law Review
1081:"FindLaw | Cases and Codes"
823:Let the punishment fit the crime
734:who investigated allegations of
1117:
1095:
600:which was to form the basis of
568:
1397:Legal doctrines and principles
1073:
1045:
1021:
961:
946:
912:
871:
855:
705:International Humanitarian Law
530:European Court of Human Rights
365:international humanitarian law
13:
1:
1257:OTP letter to senders re Iraq
1196:
881:(Göttingen: Schwartz, 1981),
1387:Law of war legal terminology
921:, p. 385, referring to
808:Non-combatant Casualty Value
732:International Criminal Court
676:Cruel and Unusual Punishment
543:
18:Principle of proportionality
7:
1364:Hampson, Françoise (2011).
801:
654:United States Supreme Court
392:Under the United Kingdom's
10:
1418:
1340:Engle, Eric Allen (2012),
895:Polizei- und Ordnungsrecht
619:developed the idea of the
450:
415:
408:
29:
1164:, p. 5, footnote 11)
877:L. Hirschberg (1978/79),
597:On Crimes and Punishments
492:European Court of Justice
1297:Human Rights Law Journal
1083:. Caselaw.lp.findlaw.com
952:P Craig and G de Burca,
848:
818:Convention on Cybercrime
440:Bundesverfassungsgericht
350:statutory interpretation
219:common law jurisdictions
813:Civilian casualty ratio
269:civil law jurisdictions
207:Patent unreasonableness
153:Fettering of discretion
993:Cite journal requires
958:(5th edn OUP 2011) 526
935:
889:, at p. 6 – cited in
799:
538:margin of appreciation
439:
430:Oberverwaltungsgericht
429:
163:Nondelegation doctrine
158:Legitimate expectation
67:Exhaustion of remedies
1346:Dartmouth Law Journal
1226:10.1353/tlj.2007.0014
1056:[1952] HCA 30
1032:[1996] HCA 29
748:
740:2003 invasion of Iraq
425:administrative courts
394:Civil Procedure Rules
267:Administrative law in
217:Administrative law in
62:Delegated legislation
1366:"Military Necessity"
1254:(February 9, 2006),
1028:Leask v Commonwealth
929:3, 383, at p. 399 –
575:proportional justice
482:the measure must be
475:the measure must be
468:the measure must be
57:Administrative court
1252:Moreno-Ocampo, Luis
1128:. Insidecounsel.com
941:University of Berne
862:Ministry of Justice
780:, an assessment of:
709:The harm caused to
625:corporal punishment
536:- the other is the
183:Fundamental justice
1402:European Union law
1324:has generic name (
1187:Moreno-Ocampo 2006
1162:Moreno-Ocampo 2006
1157:Geneva Conventions
936:Das Fallrecht
794:Luis Moreno-Ocampo
768:Geneva Conventions
724:Luis Moreno-Ocampo
453:European Union law
447:European Union law
387:military necessity
369:legal use of force
303:Constitutional law
168:Procedural justice
49:General principles
43:Administrative law
1392:International law
1308:, Hart Publishing
1270:on March 27, 2009
1175:Shamash 2005–2006
1105:. Law.cornell.edu
972:. Rochester, NY.
659:Enmund v. Florida
650:United States Law
606:relative standard
339:
338:
16:(Redirected from
1409:
1373:
1372:on June 7, 2013.
1360:
1329:
1323:
1319:
1317:
1309:
1300:
1291:
1271:
1269:
1262:
1245:
1211:
1190:
1184:
1178:
1172:
1166:
1147:
1138:
1137:
1135:
1133:
1121:
1115:
1114:
1112:
1110:
1099:
1093:
1092:
1090:
1088:
1077:
1071:
1063:
1049:
1043:
1025:
1019:
1009:
1003:
1002:
996:
991:
989:
981:
965:
959:
950:
944:
938:
916:
910:
875:
869:
859:
797:
728:Chief Prosecutor
680:Eighth Amendment
671:Tison v. Arizona
502:unfair dismissal
461:there must be a
442:
432:
331:
324:
317:
195:Unreasonableness
87:Prerogative writ
39:
38:
21:
1417:
1416:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1408:
1407:
1406:
1377:
1376:
1336:
1321:
1320:
1311:
1310:
1267:
1260:
1206:(Spring 2007).
1199:
1194:
1193:
1185:
1181:
1173:
1169:
1148:
1141:
1131:
1129:
1122:
1118:
1108:
1106:
1101:
1100:
1096:
1086:
1084:
1079:
1078:
1074:
1050:
1046:
1026:
1022:
1010:
1006:
994:
992:
983:
982:
966:
962:
951:
947:
917:
913:
876:
872:
860:
856:
851:
843:Strict scrutiny
804:
798:
792:
785:
783:
781:
761:
758:
744:proportionality
707:
592:Cesare Beccaria
571:
546:
522:
455:
449:
418:
413:
407:
377:proportionality
342:Proportionality
335:
268:
218:
190:Proportionality
173:Natural justice
144:judicial review
77:Ministerial act
35:
32:Proportionality
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1415:
1405:
1404:
1399:
1394:
1389:
1375:
1374:
1361:
1335:
1334:External links
1332:
1331:
1330:
1301:
1292:
1272:
1247:
1246:
1198:
1195:
1192:
1191:
1179:
1167:
1149:Article 52 of
1139:
1116:
1094:
1072:
1052:Burton v Honan
1044:
1020:
1004:
995:|journal=
960:
945:
911:
870:
853:
852:
850:
847:
846:
845:
840:
833:
825:
820:
815:
810:
803:
800:
790:
706:
703:
698:
697:
694:
687:
678:Clause of the
617:Jeremy Bentham
570:
567:
545:
542:
521:
518:
507:Mangold v Helm
488:
487:
480:
473:
466:
463:legitimate aim
448:
445:
417:
414:
411:Balancing test
406:
403:
402:
401:
390:
373:armed conflict
367:governing the
361:
354:
337:
336:
334:
333:
326:
319:
311:
308:
307:
306:
305:
297:
296:
295:Related topics
292:
291:
290:
289:
284:
279:
271:
270:
264:
263:
262:
261:
256:
255:
254:
247:United Kingdom
244:
239:
234:
229:
221:
220:
214:
213:
212:
211:
210:
209:
204:
192:
187:
186:
185:
180:
175:
165:
160:
155:
147:
146:
139:
138:
137:
136:
129:
124:
123:
122:
115:
110:
103:
96:
84:
79:
74:
72:Justiciability
69:
64:
59:
51:
50:
46:
45:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1414:
1403:
1400:
1398:
1395:
1393:
1390:
1388:
1385:
1384:
1382:
1371:
1367:
1362:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1338:
1337:
1327:
1315:
1307:
1302:
1298:
1293:
1290:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1273:
1266:
1259:
1258:
1253:
1249:
1248:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1231:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1210:
1205:
1204:Grimm, Dieter
1201:
1200:
1188:
1183:
1176:
1171:
1165:
1163:
1158:
1154:
1146:
1144:
1127:
1120:
1104:
1098:
1082:
1076:
1069:
1065:
1057:
1053:
1048:
1041:
1037:
1034:, (1996) 187
1033:
1029:
1024:
1017:
1013:
1008:
1000:
987:
979:
975:
971:
964:
957:
956:
949:
942:
937:
932:
928:
924:
920:
915:
908:
905:) 13 (1887),
904:
900:
896:
892:
888:
887:3-509-01147-3
884:
880:
874:
867:
863:
858:
854:
844:
841:
839:
838:
834:
831:
830:
826:
824:
821:
819:
816:
814:
811:
809:
806:
805:
795:
789:
786:
779:
778:
773:
769:
765:
755:
753:
747:
745:
741:
737:
733:
729:
725:
721:
719:
715:
712:
702:
695:
692:
688:
685:
684:
683:
681:
677:
673:
672:
667:
666:
665:Solem v. Helm
661:
660:
655:
651:
646:
643:
638:
636:
635:death penalty
632:
631:
626:
622:
618:
615:As a result,
613:
611:
607:
604:based on the
603:
599:
598:
593:
589:
588:death penalty
585:
581:
576:
566:
563:
560:
556:
552:
541:
539:
535:
531:
527:
517:
515:
514:
509:
508:
503:
499:
498:
493:
485:
481:
478:
474:
471:
467:
465:for a measure
464:
460:
459:
458:
454:
444:
441:
436:
431:
426:
423:
412:
399:
395:
391:
388:
384:
383:
378:
374:
370:
366:
362:
359:
355:
351:
347:
346:
345:
343:
332:
327:
325:
320:
318:
313:
312:
310:
309:
304:
301:
300:
299:
298:
294:
293:
288:
285:
283:
280:
278:
275:
274:
273:
272:
266:
265:
260:
259:United States
257:
253:
250:
249:
248:
245:
243:
240:
238:
235:
233:
230:
228:
225:
224:
223:
222:
216:
215:
208:
205:
203:
202:
198:
197:
196:
193:
191:
188:
184:
181:
179:
176:
174:
171:
170:
169:
166:
164:
161:
159:
156:
154:
151:
150:
149:
148:
145:
141:
140:
135:
134:
130:
128:
125:
121:
120:
116:
114:
111:
109:
108:
104:
102:
101:
100:Habeas corpus
97:
95:
94:
90:
89:
88:
85:
83:
82:Ouster clause
80:
78:
75:
73:
70:
68:
65:
63:
60:
58:
55:
54:
53:
52:
48:
47:
44:
41:
40:
37:
33:
19:
1370:the original
1349:
1345:
1322:|first=
1305:
1296:
1280:
1276:
1265:the original
1256:
1217:
1213:
1182:
1170:
1150:
1130:. Retrieved
1119:
1107:. Retrieved
1097:
1085:. Retrieved
1075:
1070:(Australia).
1051:
1047:
1042:(Australia).
1027:
1023:
1012:Constitution
1011:
1007:
986:cite journal
963:
953:
948:
914:
894:
878:
873:
857:
835:
832:1 S.C.R. 103
827:
787:
775:
771:
766:to the 1949
756:
752:Rome Statute
749:
743:
722:
716:or civilian
708:
699:
691:jurisdiction
669:
663:
657:
647:
642:deadly force
639:
630:lex talionis
628:
614:
595:
572:
569:Criminal law
547:
523:
511:
505:
495:
489:
483:
476:
469:
462:
456:
419:
380:
376:
358:criminal law
341:
340:
242:South Africa
199:
189:
142:Grounds for
131:
119:Quo warranto
117:
105:
98:
91:
36:
1352:(1): 1–11,
1151:Additional
829:R. v. Oakes
738:during the
668:(1983) and
610:culpability
584:Bloody Code
382:distinction
178:Due process
133:Ultra vires
113:Prohibition
1381:Categories
1197:References
1153:Protocol I
1068:High Court
1060:(1952) 86
1040:High Court
919:Grimm 2007
903:1366431715
891:Grimm 2007
777:inter alia
764:Protocol I
736:war crimes
621:panopticon
594:published
559:Owen Dixon
534:Convention
484:reasonable
451:See also:
409:See also:
201:Wednesbury
127:Rulemaking
93:Certiorari
1234:1710-1174
1016:s 51
931:available
714:civilians
711:protected
544:Australia
477:necessary
237:Singapore
227:Australia
1314:citation
1132:June 19,
1109:June 19,
1087:June 19,
802:See also
791:—
726:was the
718:property
662:(1982),
602:penology
470:suitable
282:Mongolia
252:Scotland
107:Mandamus
1358:1431179
1299:: 12–17
1242:4491725
1155:to the
978:2695159
925:(1954)
772:clearly
730:at the
555:Kirby J
524:In the
416:History
356:Within
287:Ukraine
1356:
1289:908369
1287:
1240:
1232:
1014:(Cth)
976:
955:EU Law
901:
885:
652:, the
422:German
371:in an
363:Under
232:Canada
1268:(PDF)
1261:(PDF)
1238:JSTOR
1054:
1038:579,
1030:
849:Notes
580:guilt
398:costs
277:China
1354:SSRN
1326:help
1285:SSRN
1230:ISSN
1134:2013
1111:2013
1089:2013
999:help
974:SSRN
933:via
899:OCLC
883:ISBN
510:and
379:and
353:act.
1222:doi
1064:169
1062:CLR
1036:CLR
907:426
648:In
612:.
608:of
1383::
1350:10
1348:,
1344:,
1318::
1316:}}
1312:{{
1283:,
1279:,
1236:.
1228:.
1218:57
1216:.
1212:.
1142:^
1066:,
1058:,
990::
988:}}
984:{{
864:,
746::
562:CJ
540:.
516:.
396:,
375:,
1328:)
1281:2
1244:.
1224::
1177:.
1136:.
1113:.
1091:.
1018:.
1001:)
997:(
980:.
943:.
939:/
927:E
796:.
437:(
389:.
330:e
323:t
316:v
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.