Inclusion and representation: The settlement of property claims of the dispossessed in the aftermath of an armed conflict

Tamar Megiddo, Eyal Benvenisti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This Article examines the authority of states to settle individual private property claims in post–conflict negotiations towards settlement. We analyze this question by exploring the limits of states’ authority to take or limit private property rights for the public good. We argue that this authority rests on two cumulative justifications: the inclusion of the property owners among the public that stands to benefit from the public good, and their representation by the government that decides on the taking of the property. In post–conflict settlement, the negotiating states may redistribute both private property and the public good between and within their respective communities. Their authority to redistribute continues to rests on the same justifications of inclusion and representation. Hence, their authority extends only to the redistribution of property of owners who are members of the respective communities that negotiate the agreement, and who are represented by a negotiating government.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)397-425
Number of pages29
JournalTheoretical inquiries in law
Volume21
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2020
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Inclusion and representation: The settlement of property claims of the dispossessed in the aftermath of an armed conflict'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this