Territorial Control by Armed Groups and the Regulation of Access to Humanitarian Assistance

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-47 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Gal
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Humanitarian Assistance ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Humanitarian Relief ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Occupied Territories ◽  
Relief Operations

Humanitarian assistance is essential for the survival of the civilian population and peoplehors de combatin the theatre of war. Its regulation under the laws of armed conflict tries to achieve a balance between humanitarian goals and state sovereignty. This balance, reflected in the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, is not as relevant to contemporary armed conflicts, most of which involve non-state armed groups. Even those provisions relating to humanitarian assistance in conflicts involving non-state armed groups fail to address properly the key features of these groups, and especially their territorial aspect. This article proposes a different approach, which takes into consideration and gives weight to the control exercised by non-state armed groups over a given territory. Accordingly, it is suggested that provisions regulating humanitarian relief operations in occupied territories should apply to territories controlled by armed groups. This approach views international humanitarian law first and foremost as an effective, realistic and practical branch of law. Moreover, it has tremendous humanitarian advantages and reflects the aims and purposes of the law, while considering the factual framework of these conflicts.

14 Humanitarian Relief Operations

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Massingham Eve ◽  
Thynne Kelisiana
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Humanitarian Assistance ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Humanitarian Relief ◽  
Armed Group ◽  
Primary Responsibility ◽  
Main Tenet ◽  
Relief Operations

This chapter examines humanitarian relief operations in armed conflict. The main tenet of international humanitarian law (IHL) is that human suffering should be limited, even in an environment where causing death and injury is, to a certain extent, legitimate. In amongst the violence and death that characterizes armed conflict in all its forms, humanitarian relief operations seek to assuage the suffering by providing protection and assistance to persons who are affected by the armed conflict. Humanitarian relief actors not only promote IHL to the parties to a conflict, but they also provide protection and assistance to victims of a conflict. States have the primary responsibility to provide humanitarian assistance to their citizens, to provide them with protection, and to respect and ensure respect for IHL. Non-state armed groups engaged in armed conflict also have a responsibility to uphold IHL and provide assistance to people in the territory which they control. However, where the state or armed group is not able to provide such assistance, humanitarian relief actors and organizations can fill the gap. Therefore, like combatants, civilians, and other protected persons, humanitarian relief personnel have specific protections, obligations, and requirements under IHL.

Special agreements as a means of enhancing compliance with IHL in non-international armed conflicts: An inquiry into the governing legal regime

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (895-896) ◽  
pp. 1195-1224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ezequiel Heffes ◽  
Marcos D. Kotlik
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Domestic Law

AbstractCommon Article 3 to the four Geneva Conventions encourages the parties to a non-international armed conflict to bring into force international humanitarian law provisions through the conclusion of special agreements. Since armed groups are ever more frequent participants in contemporary armed conflicts, the relevance of those agreements as means to enhance compliance with IHL has grown as well. The decision-making process of special agreements recognizes that all the parties to the conflict participate in the clarification and expansion of the applicable rights and obligations in a way that is consistent with the principle of equality of belligerents. This provides incentives for armed groups to respect the IHL rules they have themselves negotiated. However, even upon the conclusion of such agreements, it remains unclear which legal regime governs them. This paper will argue that special agreements are governed by international law instead of domestic law or asui generislegal regime.

International Humanitarian Law and Non-State Practice in Armed Conflict: Combatant’s Privilege and Kurdish Fighters in Syria

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 271-296
Author(s):  
Ilana Rothkopf
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Community ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Prisoner Of War ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
State Practice ◽  
The Status

Abstract Do fighters associated with non-state armed groups have the combatant’s privilege in armed conflict? Non-state armed groups are commonplace in contemporary armed conflicts. However, international humanitarian law (IHL), particularly the law that pertains to combatant’s privilege and prisoner of war status, was designed with state actors in mind. This article assesses the conditions under which the members of non-state armed groups have combatant’s privilege. Throughout, it uses the case of Kurdish fighters in Syria as an example of the timeliness of this question and its ramifications for conflict actors. This article notes, with support from the Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols, and other sources of IHL, that IHL does not foresee a combatant’s privilege for armed groups in a non-international armed conflict. It contends, however, that the international community should agree to a generalisable rule for the treatment of fighters as combatants regardless of conflict type, if these fighters demonstrate the capability and willingness to adhere to IHL. Such a rule would reduce the need to assess both conflict type and the status of individual fighters should they be captured, and more importantly, it would incentivise continued compliance with IHL.

Part II Predominant Security Challenges and International Law, Economic and Resource Security, Ch.28 Humanitarian Relief in Situations of Armed Conflict

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillard Emanuela-Chiara ◽  
Weizmann Nathalie
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Security ◽  
Human Security ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Humanitarian Relief ◽  
Security Challenges ◽  
Humanitarian Crises ◽  
Relief Operations

This chapter addresses humanitarian relief in situations of armed conflict. In many modern wars, more civilian deaths and suffering occur as a result of humanitarian crises prompted or exacerbated by the conflicts than from actual hostilities. International humanitarian law (IHL) includes an important body of rules aimed at ensuring that the basic needs of civilians caught up in conflict are met. While these protections can be considered as a manifestation of the ‘freedom from want’ dimension of human security, it is essential to bear in mind that the relevant rules of IHL are well established, binding on States and, in case of non-international armed conflict, also organized armed groups. The chapter outlines the rules of IHL regulating collective humanitarian relief operations, with a particular focus on how they balance the dictates of belligerents’ security interests and civilians’ ‘human security’ needs and entitlements. It then considers one particular way in which a pressing national and international security objective—countering terrorism—interacts with and adversely impacts the capacity of humanitarian actors to operate in a principled manner, and thus impairs the human security of populations in need.

scholarly journals Promoting Compliance with the Rules Regulating Humanitarian Relief Operations in Armed Conflict: Some Challenges

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dapo Akande ◽  
Emanuela-Chiara Gillard
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Humanitarian Assistance ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Focused Attention ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Relief ◽  
Relief Operations

In recent years, the increasingly frequent and, in certain contexts, extremely severe impediments to the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in need have focused attention on how to enhance compliance with the rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) that regulate humanitarian relief operations. Efforts to hold accountable parties to armed conflict and persons responsible for unlawfully impeding humanitarian relief operations face the challenge that the underlying rules give parties latitude in how to implement the central obligation to allow and facilitate the rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian supplies, equipment and personnel. This article outlines the rules of IHL regulating humanitarian relief operations and highlights the difficulties, in the majority of situations, of determining whether they have been violated. It then presents current endeavours to promote accountability. It concludes with some reflections on whether the threat of accountability is the most effective way of enhancing compliance with this area of IHL, at least while efforts are under way to negotiate access.

Amnesties and international humanitarian law: Purpose and scope

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (910) ◽  
pp. 357-363
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Universal Jurisdiction ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions

States party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I of 1977 have an obligation to take measures necessary to suppress all acts contrary to their provisions. Moreover, States must investigate war crimes allegedly committed by their nationals or on their territory, and other war crimes over which they have jurisdiction, such as on the basis of universal jurisdiction, and, if appropriate, prosecute the suspects. In accordance with these obligations and the limits they impose, States may adopt certain measures during and in the aftermath of armed conflicts to promote reconciliation and peace, one of which is amnesties. International humanitarian law (IHL) contains rules pertaining to the granting and scope of amnesties. Specifically, Article 6(5) of Protocol II additional to the Geneva Conventions relating to non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) provides that, at the end of hostilities, the authorities in power shall endeavour to grant the broadest possible amnesty to persons who have participated in the armed conflict, or those deprived of their liberty for reasons related to the armed conflict. Importantly, under customary IHL (as identified in Rule 159 of the ICRC customary IHL study), this excludes persons suspected of, accused of, or sentenced for war crimes in NIACs.

Respect for fundamental judicial guarantees in time of armed conflict — The part played by ICRC delegates

1992 ◽  
Vol 32 (287) ◽  
pp. 121-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Peter Gasser
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Principal Part ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
Harsh Reality

Article 75 of Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions lays down with admirable clarity and concision thateven in time of war, or rather especially in time of war, justice must be dispassionate. How does international humanitarian lawpromote this end? What can theInternational Committee of the Red Cross, an independent humanitarian institution, do in the harsh reality of an armed conflict towards maintaining respect for the fundamental judicial guarantees protecting persons accused of crimes, some of them particularly abhorrent?This article will first consider the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols in relation to judicial procedure in time of armed conflicts. Thereafter it will examine the legal bases legitimizing international scrutiny of penal proceedings instituted against persons protected by humanitarian law. The next and principal part of the article will indicate how ICRC delegates appointed to monitor trials as observers do their job. In conclusion the article will try to evaluate this little-known aspect of the ICRC's work of protection.

International humanitarian law and the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts: Recommitting to protection in armed conflict on the 70th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions

2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (911) ◽  
pp. 869-949
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
70Th Anniversary ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Areas Of Interest

This is the fifth report on international humanitarian law (IHL) and the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts prepared by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) for the International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (International Conference). Similar reports were submitted to the International Conferences held in 2003, 2007, 2011 and 2015. The aim of all these reports is to provide an overview of some of the challenges posed by contemporary armed conflicts for IHL; generate broader reflection on those challenges; and outline current or prospective ICRC action, positions, and areas of interest.

Universal acceptance of international humanitarian law — Promotional activities of the ICRC

1994 ◽  
Vol 34 (302) ◽  
pp. 450-457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Peter Gasser
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Conventional Weapons ◽  
War Victims

In its Final Declaration of 1 September 1993, the International Conference for the Protection of War Victims inter alia urged all States to make every effort to:“Consider or reconsider, in order to enhance the universal character of international humanitarian law, becoming party or confirming their succession, where appropriate, to the relevant treaties concluded since the adoption of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, in particular:—the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts of 8 June 1977 (Protocol I);—the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts of 8 June 1977 (Protocol II);—the 1980 Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons and its three Protocols;—The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict”.

International Humanitarian Law and Blockade

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phillip Drew
Keyword(s):  
Customary Law ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Relief ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Maritime Traffic ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Relief Operations

This chapter is a study of how blockade law relates to international humanitarian law, particularly that set out in Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. Noting that under the customary law of blockade all incoming and outgoing maritime traffic is prohibited, an assessment is made on whether or not the customary requirement has been displaced by the humanitarian provisions of AP1. Focusing on the wording of article 49(3), it is shown that for a number of states, the adoption of AP1 did not change the customary law, while for some others it did. As a result of this discrepancy it is posited that in spite of recent attempts to create such an obligation through soft law approaches, there is no customary law that requires humanitarian relief operations during blockade blockades.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document