Leonard M Hammer

Interests

Teaching

modern israel, international law, international human rights, international organizations, international humanitarian law, environmental law

Research

modern israel, international law, international human rights, international organizations, international humanitarian law, environmental law

Courses

Scholarly Contributions

Books

• Breger, M. J., & Hammer, L. M. (2023).

  The Contest and Control of Jerusalem's Holy Sites

  . doi:10.1017/9781108886420
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  The International Human Right to Freedom of Conscience

  . doi:10.4324/9781003073826
• Hammer, L. M. (2018).

  The International Human Right to Freedom of Conscience: Some Suggestions for Its Development and Application

  . doi:10.4324/9781315187327
  More info

  Part 1 A brief history of the development of the to conscience: early developments later developments - the emergence of conscience as separate religion post World War I conclusion. Part 2 Analysis of the treaties and other documents: international treaties - UDHR, article 18, ICCPR, article 18 regional treaties - ECHR, article 9, AmCHR, article 12, AfrCHR, article 8 other significant documents - declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief, documents referring to the to conscience conclusion. Part 3 The forum internum: the notion of a right and its implications the internal and external to conscience - Mill and the forum internum dimensions of the forum internum - identification problems, the broad scope of the forum internum, analogy to forum internum, freedom to, freedom from, significance for the forum internum, forum internum and conscience, dual notion of forum internum beliefs, developments and meaning of conscience, understanding conscience, conscience and moral action, conscience and thought conclusion. Part 4 The forum externum: forum internum and forum externum compared defining belief - narrow approach towards conscientious belief, conscience and religion, distinctions between religion and conscience, the negative, freedom from aspect, conscience and freedom of expression and assembly, distinctions between expression, assembly and conscience, broader approach limitations conclusion. Part 5 Military conscientious objection: military conscientious objection and customary law - sources within the treaties, recognition in international fora, decisions, declarations and resolutions, state practice selective conscientious objection - selective objection in resolutions and declarations, underlying problems, addressing the problems, current examples of selective conscientious objection, to asylum for military conscientious objectors, direction for the selective conscientious objector, objection to nuclear weapons conclusion. Part 6 Conscientious objection to taxes: tax objection - church tax, public support schemes, objection to military tax, military tax as a unique objection? conclusion. Part 7 Proposing a group-oriented approach to the to conscience: some general points regarding group beliefs - reference to the treaties, group beliefs defined, group and individual conflicts, forum internum and new religious movements conclusion.
• Hammer, L. M. (2016).

  A Foucauldian Approach to International Law

  . doi:10.4324/9781315564715
• Breger, M. J., Reiter, Y., & Hammer, L. M. (2013).

  The Zamzam well ritual in Islam and its Jerusalem connection AHMAD GHABIN

  . Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203137925-13
• Breger, M. J., Reiter, Y., & Hammer, L. M. (2012). Sacred Space in Israel and Palestine: Religion and Politics. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203137925
  More info

  Introduction Marshall Breger, Yitzhak Reiter and Leonard Hammer Part I: Designating and Grading Holy Places 1. "How Awesome is this Place": Holy Places in Jewish Law Aviad HaCohen 2. Holy Places and Sacred Spaces: Canonical Issues Kurt Martens 3. The Protection of Heritage and Holy Sites in International Law: A Palestinian Perspective Anwar Abu Eisheh 4. From Unknown Saint to State Site: The Jewish Dimension in the Sanctification Process of Tombs in the State of Israel Avi Sasson 5. The Renewal of the Pilgrimage to Nabi Musa Yifrach Zilberman 6. The Zamzam Well Ritual in Islam and its Jerusalem Connection Ahmad Ghabin Part II: Interpreting Religious Law in Light of Political Needs 7. The Place of Religious Aspirations for Sovreignty over the Temple Mount in Religious-Zionist Rulings Eliav Taub and Aviad Hollander 8. The Battle for the Muslim Cemeteries in Israel Sheikh Ahmad Natour Part III: The Role of Religious Leaders in Addressing Issues Pertaining to Holy Sites 9. Nationalising and Denationalising the Sacred: Shrines and Shifting Identities in the Israeli-Occupied Territories Glen Bowman 10. Political Holiness: Negotiating Holy Places in Eretz Israel/Palestine, 1937-2003 Lior Lehrs 11. Search for Common Ground: The Importance of Interfaith Cooperation for the Protection of Jerusalem's Holy Sites Sharon Rosen 12. Christian Palestinian Communities in Israel: Tensions between Laity, Clergy, and State Merav Mack
• Hammer, L. M., Emmert, F., Hammer, L. M., & Emmert, F. (2012).

  The European Convention on Human Rights and fundamental freedoms in Central and Eastern Europe

  .
  More info

  From a variety of perspectives, much has been written about the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the case law of the Court of Human Rights, and yet there seems to be a gap in the literature when it comes to the impact of the Convention in different countries, and on the question of why this impact may differ from one country to another. This book fills the gap with regard to the new Member countries of the Council of Europe (CoE) in Central and Eastern Europe, by way of a comprehensive analysis that provides truly comparable information from nearly all countries in the region. Country reports are included from all ten Central and Eastern European countries that have already joined the EU, as well as most of the other countries in the region that have joined the CoE and have ratified the ECHR after the end of communist party dictatorship. A couple of reports regarding countries that have also emerged from communism, but are not eligible for membership in the CoE, are also included for comparative purposes.
• Breger, M. J., Reiter, Y., & Hammer, L. M. (2010). Holy Places in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict : Confrontation and Co-existence. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203867457
  More info

  1. Introduction Marshall J. Breger, Yitzhak Reiter and Leonard Hammer 2. The Legal Regulation of Holy Sites Marshall J. Breger and Leonard Hammer 3. Protection of Holy Places in International Law: Objective and Subjective Approaches Leonard Hammer 4. Wars and Sacred Space: The Influence of The 1948 War on Sacred Space in the State of Israel Doron Bar 5. The Third Kind of Holy Places: The Case of Nachmanides' Cave in Jerusalem Michael Wygoda 6. The Waqf in Israel Since 1965: The Case of Acre Reconsidered Yitzhak Reiter 7. Holy Places in Urban Spaces: Foci of Confrontation or Catalyst for Development Rassem Khamaisi 8. The Pessimist's Guide to Religious Coexistence Ron E. Hassner 9. Contest or Cohabitation in Shared Holy Places: The Cave of the Patriarchs and Samuel's Tomb Yitzhak Reiter 10. Treatment of Antiquities on the Temple Mount/ Al-Haram Al-Sharif Jon Seligman 11. The Shihab Al-Din Mosque Affair in Nazareth: A Case Study of Muslim-Christian-Jewish Relations in the State of Israel Daphne Tsimhoni 12. Holy Shrines (Maqamat) in Modern Palestine/Israel and the Politics of Memory Mahmoud Yazbak 13. Self-Empowerment through the Sacred Culture and Representation in the Urban Landscape: The Mosque of Hassan Bey and the Arab Community of Jaffa Nimrod Luz 14. The Head of Husayn Ibn Ali: Its Various Places of Burial and the Miracles that it Performed Khalid Sindawi
• Hammer, L. M. (2007).

  A Foucauldian Approach to International Law: Descriptive Thoughts for Normative Issues

  .
  More info

  Foucault's challenging view of power and knowledge as the basis for interpreting the international system forms the central themes of this book. As the application of international law expands and develops this book considers how Foucault's approach may create a viable framework that is not beset by ontological issues. With International law essentially stuck within an older framework of outmoded statist approaches, and overly broad understanding of the significance of external actors such as international organizations; current interpretations are either rooted in a narrow attempt to demonstrate a functioning normative structure or interpret developments as reflective of some emerging and somewhat unwieldy ethical order. This book therefore aims to ameliorate the approaches of a number of different 'schools' within the disciplines of international law and international relations, without being wedded to a single concept. Current scholarship in international law tends to favour an unresolved critique, a utopian vision, or to refer to other disciplines like international relations without fully explaining the significance or importance of taking such a step. This book analyses a variety of problems and issues that have surfaced within the international system and provides a framework for consideration of these issues, with a view towards accounting for ongoing developments in the international arena. Contents
• Hammer, L. M. (1997).

  The International Human Right to Freedom of Conscience: An Approach to Its Application and Development.

  . doi:10.25501/soas.00034055

Chapters

• Hammer, L. M. (2024). Chapter on Hagia Sophia and Cultural Heritage Protection and another on Cultural Heritage Protection and International Law. In Two different books - one published by Routledge and another by ADIP.
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  A Brief History of the Development of the Right to Conscience

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-2
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  Analysis of the Treaties and Other Documents

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-3
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  Conclusion

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-9
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  Conscientious Objection to Taxes

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-7
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  Introduction

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-1
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  Military Conscientious Objection

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-6
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  Proposing a Group-Oriented Approach to the Right to Conscience

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-8
• Hammer, L. M. (2020).

  The Forum Internum

  . In Freedom of Conscience. doi:10.4324/9781003073826-4
• Hammer, L. M. (2019).

  Human Security and the Socialization of Peace

  . In Peace. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-78905-7_7
  More info

  A human security approach can engender a viable and lasting peacebuilding effort. The focus on the needs and security of the people, such as their social and economic developments, will better stabilize the security interests of a state in a postconflict situation. The difficulty has been how to realize such developments? Adopting a socialization framework of norms and rules can further institutionalize human security needs in a peace building context. Socialization involves a variety of actors beyond the state with a focus on the interests of people and their security (including civil society and grassroots organizations) and incorporates the essential elements of human security into a state’s internal infrastructure. Socialization can institutionalize and maintain the elements of human security approach in a measured and realistic manner.
• Hammer, L. M. (2019). Human Security and the Socialization of Peace. In The Palgrave Handbook of Global Approaches to Peace. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-78905-7_7
  More info

  A human security approach can engender a viable and lasting peacebuilding effort. The focus on the needs and security of the people, such as their social and economic developments, will better stabilize the security interests of a state in a postconflict situation. The difficulty has been how to realize such developments? Adopting a socialization framework of norms and rules can further institutionalize human security needs in a peace building context. Socialization involves a variety of actors beyond the state with a focus on the interests of people and their security (including civil society and grassroots organizations) and incorporates the essential elements of human security into a state’s internal infrastructure. Socialization can institutionalize and maintain the elements of human security approach in a measured and realistic manner.
• Hammer, L. M. (2019). The Socialization of Peace and Human Security in A. Kulnazarova and V. Popovski, eds. The Palgrave Handbook of Global Approaches to Peace, Palgrave Press, USA, 2018 (invited) The International Law of Holy Places in the Old City of Jerusalem (co-author with Marshall Breger) in T. Najem, M. Molloy, M. Bell, and J. Bell, eds. Contested Sites in Jerusalem; The Jerusalem Old City Initiative, Volume Three, Routledge Press, USA, 2018 (invited). In Two different books - noted above.
• Hammer, L. M., & Breger, M. (2018). International Law of Holy Places in Jerusalem. In Contested Sites in Jerusalem: The Jerusalem Old City Initiative, Volume Three. Routledge.
• Hammer, L. M., & Simmons, W. P. (2017). The Human Right to Dignity and Commodification of Prisoners: Considering Worldwide Challenges to Prison Privatization. In Privatization, Vulnerability, and Social Responsibility(p. 30). UK: Ashgate.
• Hammer, L. M. (2014). Intellectual Freedom from within the International Human Right to Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Religion and Belief. In Handbook of Intellectual Freedom. library juice Press.
• Hammer, L. M. (2009).

  Protection of holy places in international law: objective and subjective approaches

  . In Sacred Space in Israel and Palestine. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203867457-8

Journals/Publications

• Hammer, L. M. (2016). National Security and the Freedom of Religion or Belief. conscience and liberty.
• Hammer, L. M., & ahmed, s. (2020). Environmental Responsibility and Rohingya Refugees: Potential Grounds for Justice (co-author with Saleh Ahmed) 25 Local Environment 1021-1031 (2020). Local Environment.
• Hammer, L. (2022).

  Women and the Holy City: The Struggle over Jerusalem’s Sacred Space

  . Political Science Quarterly, 137(1), 187-189. doi:10.1002/polq.13290
• Hammer, L. (2021).

  Religious Freedom Under Scrutiny. By Heiner Bielefeldt and Michael Wiener

  . Journal of Church and State, 63(2), 322-323. doi:10.1093/jcs/csab010
• Hammer, L. M., & Ahmed, S. (2021).

  Refugee Camps Can Wreak Enormous Environmental Damages: Should Source Countries Be Liable for Them?

  . The Conversation.
• Hammer, L. (2020).

  Taiwan and Itu Aba (Taiping): Creating an ‘Island for All’ in the South China Sea

  . International Journal of Taiwan Studies, 3(1), 93-111. doi:10.1163/24688800-00301007
  More info

  One of the key decisions of the Law of the Sea Arbitration decision of 2016 was that the Itu Aba (Taiping) ‘island’ held by the Republic of China (roc) was not an island at all. Recognising the ongoing policy shifts by the roc since 2008 regarding the South China Sea, this article contends that the roc would do well to declare Itu Aba an international haven for scientific exploration. Such a move would buttress the roc’s international position, appease its allies, and allow it to maintain some form of control over its interests in the South China Sea.
• Hammer, L. M. (2020). Putting these all together:Taiwan and Itu Aba (Taiping): Creating An ‘Island For All’ in the South China Sea 3 International Journal of Taiwan Studies 93-111 (2020) // The International Human Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: Referring to Foucault to Achieve the Descriptive Moment 26 Journal of Human Rights at Mofid University 113-140 (2019)// The ‘Socialization’ of Maritime Global Governance and Taiwan: Perceiving the Benefits 9 Journal of Globalization Studies 14-26 (2018)// Cultural Heritage Protection and Sacred Spaces: Considering Alternative Approaches From Within the Human Rights Framework 50 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 73-113 (2018). different journals for four articles from 2018-2020.
• Hammer, L. M., & Ahmed, S. (2020).

  Environmental responsibility and Rohingya refugees: potential grounds for justice

  . Local Environment, 25(11-12), 1021-1031. doi:10.1080/13549839.2020.1849078
• Hammer, L. M. (2019).

  The International Human Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: Referring to Foucault to Achieve the Descriptive Moment

  . Mofid J H Rts. doi:10.22096/hr.2019.105279.1101
  More info

  این مقاله با تشخیص مشکلات ذاتی مرتبط با حقوق بشر بین­المللی در آزادی دین یا عقیده، رویکرد جایگزینی را به حق پیشنهاد می نماید. با توجه به اهمیت دانش و نقش آن در ترکیب با قدرت، می­توان از حق سخن گفت. اتخاذ مفاهیمی که ام. فوکو (M. Foucault)، پیشنهاد نموده، زمینه­ای را برای تفسیری انتقادی از دین یا عقیده به عنوان بخشی از گفتمان جاری اجتماعی فراهم می­سازد. نیازی نیست مظاهر یک دین یا عقیده را کشمکشی بین فرد و دولت دانست، بلکه باید آن را در چارچوبی گسترده­تر درک نمود. می­توان عوامل دیگری در جهت درک یک عقیده، از جمله اظهارات یک فرد معتقد، را بدون لزوم ارزیابی مزایای آن عقیده بررسی نمود.
• Hammer, L. M. (2019). I am listing my entire output for 2018 and 2019 below as this is too time consuming. Journals and publications noted below.
  More info

  Book:The Contest and Control of Jerusalem's Holy Sites (co-authored with M. Breger)Forthcoming, Cambridge University Press (2021)Articles:Taiwan and Itu Aba (Taiping): Creating An ‘Island For All’ in the South China Sea 3 International Journal of Taiwan Studies 93-111 (2020)The International Human Right to Freedom of Religion or Belief: Referring to Foucault to Achieve the Descriptive Moment 26 Journal of Human Rights at Mofid University 113-140 (2019)The ‘Socialization’ of Maritime Global Governance and Taiwan: Perceiving the Benefits 9 Journal of Globalization Studies 14-26 (2018)Cultural Heritage Protection and Sacred Spaces: Considering Alternative Approaches From Within the Human Rights Framework 50 Columbia Human Rights Law Review 73-113 (2018)Book Chapters:The Socialization of Peace and Human Security in A. Kulnazarova and V. Popovski, eds. The Palgrave Handbook of Global Approaches to Peace, Palgrave Press, USA 2018 (invited)The International Law of Holy Places in the Old City of Jerusalem (co-author with Marshall Breger) in T. Najem, M. Molloy, M. Bell, and J. Bell, eds. Contested Sites in Jerusalem; The Jerusalem Old City Initiative, Volume Three, Routledge Press, USA, 2018 (invited)
• Hammer, L. M. (2018). Cultural Heritage and Sacred Space. Columbia H Rts L Rev.
• Hammer, L. M. (2018). Maritime Global Governance and Taiwan. Journal of Globalisation Studies.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017). 2015 Comprehensive Agreement. Oxford J. of L. and Rel., 6, 162-179.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017).

  The “Socialization” of Maritime Global Governance and Taiwan Perceiving the Benefits

  . J of Globalization. doi:10.14666/2194-7759-6-2-004
  More info

  Certain maritime global governance frameworks exist and can at times even be effective. Yet, serious implementation matters and dire environmental circumstances persist. Control mechanisms are mainly in the hands of states or outmoded international organizations facing off against powerful economic intermediaries engaged in exploitation and driven by strong demand from export markets. Political interests also weaken the system, such as disallowing important maritime actors like Taiwan from taking a part in the process. Given that maritime global governance is constantly shifting due to a host of changing processes, proper governance requires structural alteration as well as temporal accountability. A socialization context for maritime global governance, that emphasizes partnership models incorporating both private and public actors (such as market-based bodies with civil society actors to inform and direct regulatory bodies), can not only improve maritime governance but also allow for participation by Taiwan. Including a wider range of stakeholders like media, politicians, interest groups, and consumers along with an assistive reference to new forms of technologies, can result in activating infrastructures that combine varying interests (like economic and environment) and result in a more effective form of maritime global governance. At the same time, it can open the door for Taiwan to effectively join in environmental initiatives and international projects relating to maritime governance.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017).

  The Socialization of Human Rights as an Inroad to Protect Sacred Space

  . Columb. H Rts L R..
• Hammer, L. M. (2017). The Holy See and the Palestinian Authority. Middle East Quarterly.
• Hammer, L. (2016). Comparative Commercial Contracts: Law, Culture and Economic Development. By Boris Kozolchyk. Journal of International Economic Law, 20(3), 735-740. doi:10.1093/jiel/jgw063
• Simmons, W. P., & Hammer, L. M. (2016).

  The human right to dignity and commodification of prisoners: Considering worldwide challenges to prison privatization

  . Book Chapter. doi:10.4324/9781315387543-22
• Simmons, W. P., & Hammer, L. M. (2015).

  Privatization of Prisons in Israel and Beyond: A Per Se Violation of the Human Right to Dignity

  . Santa Clara Intl L J.
• Simmons, W. P., & Hammer, L. M. (2015). Privatization of Prisons and Immigration Detention Facilities in Arizona: A Per Se Violation of Human Rights?. Santa Clara Journal of International Law, 40.
• Hammer, L. M. (2012).

  Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State: Jewish Law Association Studies XXI (2011). Edited by Asher Maoz.

  . Oxford J of Freedom of Rel.. doi:10.1093/ojlr/rwr004
• Hammer, L. (2011).

  Re-examining the extraterritorial application of the ECHR to northern Cyprus: the need for a measured approach

  . The International Journal of Human Rights, 15(6), 858-872. doi:10.1080/13642981003617204
  More info

  Extraterritorial application of the ECHR to Turkey in northern Cyprus in a whole scale manner is misplaced. Given the underlying reasoning behind the effective control standard that is linked to notions of international humanitarian law and occupied territory, and accounting for a historic understanding of the situation in northern Cyprus and how it developed, it is conceivable that Turkey should not maintain the full gamut of obligations under the ECHR.
• Hammer, L. M. (2011). Re-examining the extraterritorial application of the ECHR to northern Cyprus: the need for a measured approach. International Journal of Human Rights, 15. doi:10.1080/13642981003617204
  More info

  Abstract Extraterritorial application of the ECHR to Turkey in northern Cyprus in a whole scale manner is misplaced. Given the underlying reasoning behind the effective control standard that is linked to notions of international humanitarian law and occupied territory, and accounting for a historic understanding of the situation in northern Cyprus and how it developed, it is conceivable that Turkey should not maintain the full gamut of obligations under the ECHR. Keywords: European Convention on Human Rightsnorthern Cypruseffective controloccupied territory Acknowledgement Many thanks to Dr Rebecca Bryant for her thoughtful comments and insights. Notes For an overview of the cases, see E. Berry, ‘The Extra Territorial Reach of the ECHR’, European Public Law 12, no. 4 (2006): 629; D. Kamchibekova, ‘State Responsibility for Extraterritorial Human Rights Violations’, Buffalo Human Rights Law Review 13 (2007): 87. Notably, the Israeli Separation Wall Advisory Opinion, ‘Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory’, Advisory opinion of 9 July 2004, 2004 ICJ Rep. 136 (ICJ applied human rights obligations on Israel, deriving from both the Geneva Conventions and human rights treaties, in the occupied territories) and Congo v. Uganda, Case Concerning the Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of Congo v. Uganda) Judgement of 19 December 2005 General List No. 116 (ICJ applied human rights obligations to the areas under the effective control of Ugandan troops). See also J. Cerone, ‘Jurisdiction and Power: The Intersection of Human Rights Law and the Law of Non-International Armed Conflict in an Extraterritorial Context’, Israel Law Review 40, no. 2 (2007): 72 (noting the difference in scope for the Israeli Wall case, where the ICJ distinguished between effective control for civil and political obligations as opposed to territorial control for economic and social rights, whereas in the Congo v. Uganda case, the ICJ seemed to rely upon a single standard for all forms of human rights – when a state is exercising jurisdiction, such as maintaining effective control over an area). For an overview of extraterritorial human rights applications in different international forums, see M. Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle: Clarifying the Concept of State Jurisdiction in Human Rights Treaties’, Human Rights Law Review 8, no. 3 (2008): 411; V. Mantouvalou, ‘Extending Judicial Control in International Law: Human Rights Treaties and Extraterritoriality’, International Journal of Human Rights 9 (2005): 147. M. Pedersen, ‘Territorial Jurisdiction in Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights’, Nordic Journal of International Law 73 (2004): 279. See e.g. C. McCarthy, ‘Legal Conclusion or Interpretative Process? Lex Specialis and the Applicability of International Human Rights Standards’, in International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law: Towards a New Merger in International Law, eds R. Arnold and N. Quenivet (Leiden: M. Nijhoff, 2008), 101. See discussion infra. Article 1 of the ECHR provides: The High Contracting Parties shall secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in Section 1 of this Convention. X v. Germany, 25 September 1965, Yearbook of the ECHR 1965–68, 158. The case was eventually dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence. Decisions and Reports of the ECHR, 1972–1975, 125. Report of the Commission 6780/74 and 6950/75 Republic of Cyprus v. Republic of Turkey, 10 July 1976 and 72 D&R 5 (1983). See also Chrysostomos and Papachrystomou v. Turkey (1991) 68 D&R 216 (Turkish forces exercised control over northern Cyprus and thus the area under Turkish jurisdiction). Loizidou v. Turkey, 28 Eur. Ct. H.R. 2216 (1996) and 81 Eur. Ct. H. R. 1807 (1998). For a discussion of the case, see e.g. L. Klarevas, ‘Turkey's Right-v.-Might Dilemma in Cyprus: Reviewing the Implications of Loizidou v. Turkey’, Mediterranean Quarterly 10 (1999): 97. Note that as envisioned at the time, a slew of cases based on the Loizidou approach of the Court have been filed against Turkey. See Pedersen, ‘Territorial Jurisdiction in Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights’, at note 63. Republic of Cyprus v. Republic of Turkey, 10 May 2001, ECoHR no. 00025781/94 (judgement on merits). Note, as well the 2008 case concerning missing persons, Varnava and others v. Turkey, 10 January 2008, ECoHR nos 16064-6/90 and 16068-73/90 (referred to the Grand Chamber), discussed infra. The case has far-reaching effects regarding Turkey, such as to further complicate Turkey's application to join the European Community, a matter made difficult given Turkey's refusal to engage the Republic of Cyprus in any way. This approach has been criticized, with the view that Turkey is violating its treaty obligations to the EU, as well as incorrectly relying on the 1960 treaties as a basis for its actions in 1974. See e.g. E. Katselli, ‘The Ankara Agreement, Turkey, and the EU’, International and Comparative Law Quarterly 55, no.3 (2006) 705–717. Republic of Cyprus v. Republic of Turkey, 10 May 2001, ECoHR no. 00025781/94 (judgement on merits) at paras 90–1. Mantouvalou, ‘Extending Judicial Control in International Law’, 148–9. Cf. Ilascu and other v. Moldova and Russia, 8 July 2004 ECoHR n. 00048787/99, where the application of the ECHR was upheld principally against Russia, given its support for the separatists in the region in question, and the fact that it maintained a decisive influence over the Transdniestra Republic. Moldova was also held to bear on a lesser basis, by virtue of its obligation to secure the human rights of the inhabitants in the area. Compare Issa et. al. v. Turkey, 30 May 2000 ECHR Admissibility Decision no. 00031821/96 (case against Turkey concerning wrongful death of shepherds in Iraq following a military excursion by Turkish troops was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction principally because Turkey did not maintain any form of effective control of the area when it pursued Kurdish rebel troops outside its borders). Note as well, for further clarification, Ocalan v. Turkey, 12 March 2003 ECHR no. 00046221/99 (decision on merits) where the ECHR Court upheld the jurisdiction of Turkey over Ocalan, and thus ECHR human rights obligations, as Turkey apprehended Ocalan in Kenya and brought him back to Turkey – thereby asserting effective authority and control over him. See Kamchibekova, ‘State Responsibility for Extraterritorial Human Rights Violations’, 110. ‘The European court has rarely made direct reference to humanitarian law, using humanitarian law principles to interpret specific situations without referring to them by name.’; Pedersen, ‘Territorial Jurisdiction in Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights’, 287. 21 December 2001 ECHR Admissibility no. 00052207/99. See generally C. Ryngaert, Jurisdiction in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008). For a strong critique of the case, see E. Roxstrum, M. Gibney and T. Einarsen, ‘The NATO Bombing Case (Bancovic et. al. v. Belgium et. al.) and the Limits of Western Human Rights Protection’, Boston University International Law Journal 23 (2005): 55. For an excellent discussion and contextual analysis of the case, see M. Happold, ‘Bankovic v Belgium and the Territorial Scope of the European Convention on Human Rights’, Human Rights Law Review 3, no. 1 (2003): 77. Bancovic v. Belgium at para. 80. See also Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle’, 26, noting that Bancovic was a misapplied understanding of the traditional notion of jurisdiction and the capacity of a state to apply rules and regulations, as discussed infra. Compare Pedersen, ‘Territorial Jurisdiction in Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights’, asserting that Bancovic was decided correctly as there was no factual control over the area by NATO troops since the forces did not assume responsibilities that pertain to an occupying power. See e.g. E. Guild, ‘Inside Out or Outside In? Examining Human Rights in Situations of Armed Conflict’, International Community Law Review 9 (2007): 33, at 47 noting that the ECHR Court rejected the possibility that individuals within the European space would be left without a remedy to challenge human rights abuses. See also Kamchibekova, ‘State Responsibility for Extraterritorial Human Rights Violations’, 120–1. See e.g. Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle’, 24. Pedersen, ‘Territorial Jurisdiction in Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights’, 282. See e.g. Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle’; R. Wilde, ‘Triggering State Obligations Extraterritorially: The Spatial Test in Certain Human Rights Treaties’, Israel Law Review 40, no. 2 (2007): 503. Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle’, 8. See generally Ryngaert, Jurisdiction in International Law, at Chapter Two (noting the preference by states for asserting jurisdiction pursuant to a territorial or personal connection, although there are limitations imposed that would indicate a state also must justify its jurisdiction, in accordance with the 1927 Permanent Court of International Justice case of France v. Turkey – referred to as the Lotus case). See generally Ryngaert, Jurisdiction in International Law, at Chapters Three and Five (noting the preference for the territorial principle as it has developed since the seventeenth century). See e.g. Berry, ‘The Extra Territorial Reach of the ECHR’, 650 (‘…jurisdiction under Article 1 [of the ECHR] need not be identical with jurisdiction as a matter of public international law…’). Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle’, 14, referring to the notion of belligerent occupation and actual control; T. Ruys and S. Verhoeven, ‘DRC v. Uganda: The Applicability of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights law in Occupied Territories’, in International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights: Towards a New Merger in International Law, ed. R. Arnold and N. Quenivet (Leiden: M. Nijhoff Pub., 2008), 176, noting the lack of any need to demonstrate attributable state action, as the key is effective control, which is enough to establish the gamut of human rights protection rather than making a determination as to whether the state's actions actually affect the human rights situation in particular. Cf. Wilde, ‘Triggering State Obligations Extraterritorially’, 516, noting that Bancovic called for effective control where the authority also engages some form of public powers, whereas in the Cyprus case, the Court adhered to a rather broad standard of effective control in fact. Wilde concludes that the public powers component of control is still a viable aspect of the determination. Cerone, ‘Jurisdiction and Power’, 40, points out as well that the ECHR Court seemed to relax the standard even further by relying on the power and authority exerted by a state over an area, a more incorporative standard than effective overall control, since ‘anyone within territory under the effective control of a state would also be under the state's power and authority’. Milanovic, ‘From Compromise to Principle’, 32. See also Kamchibekova, ‘State Responsibility for Extraterritorial Human Rights Violations’, 107, noting for example 48787/99 Ilascu v. Moldova and 71503/01 Assanidze v. Georgia where even though these states did not exercise control over the areas in question, the states still maintained a (limited) form of (negative) human rights responsibility to the population. Wilde, ‘Triggering State Obligations Extraterritorially’, 524. E. Benvenisti, The International Law of Occupation (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2004), 4, defines occupation as the effective control of a power over territory ‘to which that power has no sovereign title, without the volition of the sovereign of that territory’. See also K. Guttieri, ‘Making Might Right: The Legitimization of Occupation’, paper presented at the 45th Annual International Studies Association Convention, Montreal, Canada, 17–20 March 2004 (‘Military occupation involves exercising some coercive control over people in a territory other than that recognized as belonging to your state’), at 11. Ruys and Verhoeven, ‘DRC v. Uganda’, 161. But see C. Lopes and N. Quenivet, ‘Individuals as Subjects of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law’, in International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights: Towards a New Merger in International Law ed. R. Arnold and N. Quenivet (Leiden: M. Nijhoff Pub., 2008), 199. See e.g. Guild, ‘Inside Out or Outside In?’, 44. Ruys and Verhoeven, ‘DRC v. Uganda’, at 164 referring to the ICTY cases of Naletilic and Martinovic. Ibid. at 173, referring to the Cyprus v. Turkey case, as well as additional instances from the Human Rights Committee concerning Belgian troops in Somalia and Croatian troops in Bosnia and Herzegovnia. A. Orakhelashvili, ‘The Interaction Between Human Rights and Humanitarian Law: Fragmentation, Conflict, Parallelism, or Convergence?’, European Journal of International Law 19, no. 1(2008): 161; P. Alston, J. Morgan-Foster and W. Abresch, ‘The Competence of the UN Human Rights Council and its Special Procedures in relation to Armed Conflicts: Extrajudicial Executions in the “War on Terror”’, European Journal of International Law 19, no. 1 (2008): 183. See e.g. McCarthy, ‘Legal Conclusion or Interpretative Process?’, 110, noting for example that when considering human rights, it is imperative to account for the fact that there is some form of state–individual relationship, and not the more formalised state–state relationship that generally exists in treaty law. Ibid., 113. Orakhelashvili, ‘The Interaction Between Human Rights and Humanitarian Law’, 161 (clarification of the relationship between human rights and humanitarian law ‘requires the accurate assessment of the available evidence, and not the preconceived approach that tends to conceive one of these two fields as lex specialis that excludes or curtails the protection under the other field’). He also asserts that humanitarian law does not necessarily maintain a lower level of protection than human rights. McCarthy, ‘Legal Conclusion or Interpretative Process?’, 117. Cerone, ‘Jurisdiction and Power’, noting at n. 139 that this is the case under customary international law. See e.g. Bancovic v. Belgium, para. 75. For an excellent analysis, one that concludes that the overall effective control test will probably ‘find favour in the future’, see R. Wilde, ‘Triggering State Obligations Extraterritorially: The Spatial Test in Certain Human Rights Treaties’, in International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights: Towards a New Merger in International Law, ed. R. Arnold and N. Quenivet (Leiden: M. Nijhoff Pub., 2008), 131. See e.g. Wilde, ‘Triggering State Obligations Extraterritorially’, 518. B. Meier, ‘Reunification of Cyprus: The Possibility of Peace in the Wake of Past Failure’, Cornell International Law Journal 34 (2001): 458. But see W. Mallinson, Cyprus: A Modern History (New York: I.B. Taurus, 2005), 49, asserting that Britain did eventually support enosis given the underlying desire to maintain military bases on the island and the view that Greece would be a more willing partner to that effect as it is a member of NATO. Meier, ‘Reunification of Cyprus’, 460. See also Mallinson, Cyprus: A Modern History, 22–5, 33 (criticising the position of the UK due to its presumed support of the Turkish Cypriot community before 1960). Meier, ‘Reunification of Cyprus’, 463. Z. Necatigil, The Cyprus Question and the Turkish Position in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 65. Note as well that a change occurred in the perception of the Turkish Cypriot goals already during the British Mandate period when the Turkish Cypriots moved from the goal of protecting the religious interests of the Muslim minority to more nationalist goals focusing on political rights in the vein of Kemalist nationalism. See e.g. C. Yennaris, From the East: Conflict and Partition in Cyprus (London: Elliot and Thompson, Ltd., 1999), 39–40. This movement was strengthened by the emergence of trade unions specifically for the Turkish Cypriot minority in the 1940s. Ibid., 45. The Turkish Cypriots became even more politically organised in the years leading up to 1960, especially as Turkey became more interested in the island and assisted the fledging political groups. Ibid., 84–5, 90–1. Negatigil, The Cyprus Question, 66. D. Isachenko, ‘The Production of Recognized Space in Informal States: State-Building Practices of North Cyprus and Transnistria’, paper presented at the ISA Convention, Chicago, USA, February 28–March 3, 2007, at 4. Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 66–7. Mallinson, Cyprus: A Modern History, 55, notes (in a somewhat bewildering manner) that the Greek Cypriot actions were necessary ‘because of the refusal of Turkish Cypriots to participate in the government, which had become the victim of an unworkable constitution in the first place’. Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 67. Yennaris, From the East, 201–3, notes the creation of a new constitution and division of powers specifically for the Turkish Cypriots, claiming, at 209–11, that the pre-1974 elections of a Turkish Cypriot leader were under direct pressure from Turkey to remove all forms of internal opposition, so as to ensure for a strong and unified political front. Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 67–8. Ibid., 68, referring, most significantly, to a UN Secretary General report from 1964. Geneva Declaration of July 1974 on Cyprus, 30 July 1974, http://www.trncinfo.com/tanitmadairesi/2002/ENGLISH/DOCUMENTS/5a.htm, Section 5, para. 4 – ‘The Ministers noted the existence in practice in the Republic of Cyprus of two autonomous administrations, that of the Greek Cypriot community and that of the Turkish Cypriot community’ (accessed March 1, 2010). Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 69. Ibid., 73. Meier, ‘Reunification of Cyprus’, 463. Ibid., 463. Ibid., 464. See e.g. Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 71, referring to a Security Council Resolution from 1964 that established a United Nations Peacekeeping Force in the area that relied on the Greek Cypriot majority to approve its presence, presumably because the situation was dire and that the matter was thought to achieve a solution in a short span of time. See S.C. Res. 353, UN SCOR, 29th Sess., 1781st mtg (1974). Meier, ‘Reunification of Cyprus’, 465. See e.g. R.R. Denktash, The Cyprus Triangle (New York: TRNC Office, 1988), 119, noting the desire to attain a settlement pursuant to an inter-communal partnership. Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 106–7, referring to UK cases like Hesperides Hotel and others v. Aegan Turkish holidays and another (1977) 3 WLR 656 and Polly Peck International Plc v. Asil Nadir and others (1992) 2 LLR 238. Meier, ‘Reunification of Cyprus’, 468, referring to S.C. Res. 939, UN SCOR, 3412th mtg, UN Doc S/RES/9939 (1994). Necatigil, The Cyprus Question, 318–19. Examples of this are informal arrangements to deal with migrant workers and the illegal trafficking of women. Acting, in their eyes, pursuant to the 1960 treaties as a means of providing protection to the Turkish Cypriot minority. See e.g. Isachenko, ‘The Production of Recognized Space in Informal States’, 9, referring to 2005 changes made to the Bayram ceremony. See e.g, Y. Dinstein, ‘Legislation Under Article 43 of the Hague Regulations: Belligerent Occupation and Peacebuilding’ (2004-1) Occasional Paper Series, Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research, 2004, noting that whilst the occupying power is to maintain the pre-existing laws prior to occupation, in a long-term occupation, one still must meet the ever-changing needs of the local population, as well as remove any form of pre-existing discrimination, pursuant to the requirements of the Geneva Convention. See e.g., Varnava case from 2008 (to be heard by the ECHR Grand Chamber), see note 13, where the court found ongoing violation of Articles 2,3 and 5 especially as Turkey did not conduct a proper investigation into the matter to determine the whereabouts of the missing people. Ibid., paras 133, 138, and 145. Note that Article 3 was deemed inhuman treatment, not torture, as a result of the lack of investigation, ibid. para. 138, and no damages (other than attorney fees) were rewarded. Ibid., paras 158–9, and 163. See e.g. ibid., para. 129. By contrast, Turkish Cypriot claims over missing individuals were dismissed as being unreasonably late given the long time period (with no discussion of ongoing violations). The Greek Cypriot cases were deemed to be within a proper timeframe because they were filed within three years of Turkey's ratification of the ECHR and were considered ongoing violations. Ibid., paras 117–18. In a separate opinion in the Varnava case, Judge Eronen held that there was no continuing violation since it is the date of the disappearance that is the seminal factor for determining a time frame, and over an extended period of time, the individual is eventually presumed dead. Ibid., separate opinion. One also may question whether the ongoing violation was actually ‘committed’ by Turkey, save for those instances where the missing individuals were presumably moved to Turkish soil such as to be considered under actual Turkish jurisdiction. Presumably, these prisoners were eventually returned to Cyprus, and it seems that the majority of missing persons actually resulted from actions of the Turkish Cypriot military factions, rather than the Turkish troops. R. Lawson, ‘Life after Bancovic: on the Extraterritorial Application of the European Convention on Human Rights’, in Extraterritorial Application of Human Rights Treaties, ed. F. Coomans and T. Kamminga (Oxford: Intersentia, 2004), 98. Ibid., 99.
• Hammer, L. M. (2006).

  From Public to Private Law in the Occupied Territories Expanding the Israeli Presence Via the Rule of Law

  . Journal of Intl. L..
  More info

  While the aspects of public international law clearly play a role in the Israeli Occupied Territories, one also should not ignore the private international law implications. Extraterritorial application of Israeli law has moved beyond the confines of applying solely to cases between Israelis, as had been the norm thus far, and into the penumbra of also applying to Palestinians who venture into Israeli-occupied towns. Slowly, one can discern a broadening of the Israeli rule of law, thus leading to an eventual application of Israeli law in the majority of instances, at least with regard to actions involving Israeli towns and companies. This can have a greater long term impact on the Israeli legal system's perception of the Israeli presence in the Occupied Territories.
• Hammer, L. M. (2004).

  Indigenous Peoples as a Catalyst for Applying the Human Right to Water

  . Neth. J H, Rts. doi:10.1163/157181104322784835
• Hammer, L. M. (2002).

  Selective Conscientious Objection and International Human Rights

  . Israel L r.. doi:10.1017/s0021223700018008
• Hammer, L. M. (1999).

  Migrant Workers in Israel: Towards Proposing a Framework of Enforceable Customary International Human Rights

  . Mich J Intl L.. doi:10.1177/092405199901700102
• Hammer, L. M. (1999).

  Part A: Articles Migrant Workers In Israel: Towards Proposing A Framework Of Enforceable Customary International Human Rights / Часть А: вопросы об иностранных рабочих в Израиле: на пути к предложению принудительной и стандартной системы международных прав человека

  . Chapter in a book in Russia.
• Hammer, L. (1998). Reconsidering The Israeli Courts' Application Of Customary International Law In The Human Rights Context. ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law, 5(1), 23-41.
• Hammer, L. M. (1998).

  Reconsidering The Israeli Courts' Application Of Customary International Law In The Human Rights Context

  . Nova Scotia J Intl L.

Presentations

• Hammer, L. M. (2021, fall). 2 more for 2021 -Law and Society Association, Online, 2021 Environmental damage as grounds for refugee compensation // ADIP, Conversion of Spaces and Places of Worship, Online, 2021 The Hagia Sophia and Turkey’s Obligations under International Law. LSA in NY// ADIP in Istanbul.
• Simmons, W. P., & Hammer, L. M. (2015, April). Commodifying Incarcerated Bodies in the U.S., Israel, and Beyond. Open Embodiments: Locating Somatachnics in Tucson. Tucson, AZ.
• Hammer, L. M. (2021). The following took place in 2021:The Intentional Destruction of the Cultural Heritage of Mankind: What Are the Remedies under International Law? La Sapienza University of Rome, 2021 Forms of Reparation and their Effective Implementation 2021 International Virtual Exchange Conference, Online, 2021 Multi-nodal Pedagogy Across Continents Cultural Heritage in Law and Diplomacy: A Webinar, Online, 2021 Roundtable of six experts, sponsored by Tufts University, University of Oxford, and CSU-Fresno State International Studies Association, Human Rights and Foreign Policy, Online, 2021 The Hagia Sophia, Republic of Turkey, and Foreign Policy. Online events.
• Hammer, L. M. (2020, 2019-2020). Listing 3 at once -KIMEP University Law School, Almaty, Kazakhstan, 2019 Cultural Heritage Protection, Human Rights, and Jerusalem //2019 International Virtual Exchange Conference, Tacoma, Washington, USA Effective Video Conference Interaction between Students, Faculty, and Human Rights Practitioners around the Globe// LSA 2019 Conference, Washington, DC Cultural Heritage Protection and Human Dignity. KIMEP in Khazakhstan// IVEC conference in Washington// LSA conference in DC.
• Hammer, L. M. (2020, June). Socialization of cultural heritage. ACUNS - UN University.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017, Fall, 2017). Cultural Heritage Protection and the Socialization of Human Rights. The Social Practice of Human Rights. Dayton, Ohio.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017, Fall, 2017). Zionism and Modern Israel. International Relations Faculty. National Chengchi University: Taipei, Taiwan.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017, Spring, 2017). Cultural Heritage Protection: Critical Overview. Freedom of Religion. Jerusalem Israel: Van Leer Institute.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017, Spring, 2017). Holy See and Israel. Kennedy Center Guest Lecture. Brigham Young University.
• Hammer, L. M. (2017, Summer, 2017). South China Seas from an Environmental Perspective. Institute for International Relations. National Chengchi University: Tapei, Taiwan.
• Hammer, L. M., & Simmons, W. P. (2017, June). “Implications of Pervasive Maltreatment and Mislabeling of Female Trafficking Victims and Consensual Sex Workers in Arizona, USA: Towards a Comparative Perspective”. Irregular Migrants, Refugees or Victims of Human-Trafficking? Analysis, Advocacy and Assistance between Categorizations and (Self-) Identifications, International Seminar on Mixed Migration,. Bangkok Thailand.
• Hammer, L. M. (2016, Spring, 2016). The Environment and International Human Rights. Seri Equity Colloquium. Bren School, UC Santa Barbara.
• Hammer, L. M. (2015, Fall, 2015). International Law Approaches to Sacred Space. G20 Interfaith Summit. Istanbul, Turkey.
• Hammer, L. M. (2015, Fall, 2015). The BDS Law in Israel and Free Expression. Freedom of Expression and Religion in a Multicultural World. Istanbul, Turkey: Fatih Sultan Mehmet Waqf University.

Reviews

• Hammer, L. M. (2021. Two different book reviewsBook Review of Women and the Holy City: The Struggle over Jerusalem's Sacred Space by Lihi Ben Shitrit __ Political Science Quarterly __ (2021) Book Review of Religious Freedom Under Scrutiny by Heiner Bielefeldt and Michael Wiener __ Journal of Church and State __ (2021).
• Hammer, L. M. (2016. Book review of international comparative commercial law. journal of international economic law.
• Hammer, L. M. (2014. O. H. Cinar Conscientious Objection to Military Service in International Human Rights Law.