5cjxburmr

15.3.3 Correlative or Reciprocal Nature of Rights and Duties Under the Law ofNeutrality. The rights and duties of belligerents and neutrals under the law of neutrality may beunderstood as correlative or reciprocal.The duties of neutrals often correspond to rights of belligerents, and rights of neutralsoften correspond to the duties of belligerents. 77 For example, the duty of a neutral to abstainfrom hostilities is also a right of a belligerent not to have its adversary aided in hostilities by theneutral State. The right of a neutral State to have its territory be inviolable is also a duty ofbelligerent States to avoid conducting hostilities in neutral territory.Similarly, the ability of a neutral to assert its rights may depend on whether it hasfulfilled its corresponding neutral duties. 78 For example, the right of a neutral State to have itsterritory be inviolable may not be asserted to the extent it has failed in its duty to ensure that itsterritory is not used as a base of operations by a belligerent.In light of the correlative nature of the rights and duties of belligerents and neutrals underthe law of neutrality, a single rule in the law of neutrality may reflect multiple rights and dutiesof both belligerents and neutrals. For example, hostile acts are not to be committed on neutralterritory. This rule involves the right of the neutral State for its territory to be inviolable, andinvolves a duty on the part of the neutral State to prevent such acts. This rule also reflects a dutyof the belligerent State to refrain from such acts, and a right of the belligerent State not to havesuch acts conducted by an opposing belligerent.15.4 REMEDIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF NEUTRALITY LAW15.4.1 Distinction Between Violations of Neutral Duties and the End of Neutral Status.Violations of neutrality by belligerent or neutral States should be distinguished from the end of amaterial, and the like, and the sending of clothes and money to prisoners of war, can never be construed as acts ofpartiality, even if these comforts are provided for the wounded and the prisoners of one belligerent only.”).76 LESLIE C. GREEN, THE CONTEMPORARY LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT 269 (2nd ed., 2000) (“Frequently, as has beenseen in the discussion concerning protecting powers, a neutral power is appointed to represent the interests of onebelligerent in the territory of the adverse party or for some of its nationals to be appointed to the Fact FindingCommission called for in Protocol I in relation to the investigation of alleged breaches of the law of armed conflict.In neither case can a belligerent suggest that such action is in breach of the obligations of neutrality.”).77 TUCKER, THE LAW OF WAR AND NEUTRALITY AT SEA 203 footnote 14 (“It is also helpful to observe that the dutiesof a neutral correspond to the rights of a belligerent, and that the rights of a neutral correspond to the duties of abelligerent. The neutral’s duty to observe a strict impartiality corresponds to the belligerent’s right to demandimpartiality on the part of the neutral. At the same time, the neutral has a right to demand that the belligerent willact toward it in such a manner as to respect its position of impartiality, and there is no question but that thebelligerent is under a duty to do so.”).78 G. SHERSTON BAKER, II HALLECK’S INTERNATIONAL LAW 305 (28.1) (1908) (“The rights and duties of neutralityare correlative, and the former cannot be claimed, unless the latter are faithfully performed. If the neutral State failto fulfil the obligations of neutrality, it cannot claim the privileges and exemptions incident to that condition. Therule is equally applicable to the citizens and subjects of a neutral State. So long as they faithfully perform the dutiesof neutrality, they are entitled to the rights and immunities of that condition. But for every violation of neutralduties, they are liable to the punishment of being treated in their persons or property as public enemies of theoffended belligerent.”).943