Adoption of the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977: A milestone in the development of international humanitarian law

2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (905) ◽  
pp. 785-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Bugnion
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
40Th Anniversary ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
The Law ◽  
War Victims

AbstractOn 8 June 1977, the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts adopted two Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. This was the result of nearly ten years of intensive and delicate negotiations. Additional Protocol I protects the victims of international armed conflicts, while Additional Protocol II protects the victims of non-international armed conflicts. These Protocols, which do not replace but supplement the 1949 Geneva Conventions, updated both the law protecting war victims and the law on the conduct of hostilities. This article commemorates the 40th anniversary of the adoption of the 1977 Additional Protocols.

The prohibition of reprisals in Protocol I: Greater protection for war victims

1997 ◽  
Vol 37 (320) ◽  
pp. 524-527
Author(s):  
Konstantin Obradovic
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The World ◽  
The Law ◽  
Yugoslav Wars ◽  
War Victims

It is not without reservations that I am responding to the invitation from the Review for ‘veterans’ of the Diplomatic Conference on the reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts (hereafter the Diplomatic Conference) to commemorate the signing 20 years ago of the Protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions. On 8 June 1977, all of us who contributed in one way or another to the drafting of those texts felt a sense of relief at having finally achieved our task. We also felt a kind of exhilaration at the thought that we had successfully completed an important undertaking that would benefit war victims. The two Protocols represented a major leap forward in the law of armed conflict. It should not be forgotten that practically two-thirds of the international community have now ratified these instruments. Yet compliance with them regrettably remains far from satisfactory. I need hardly recite the tragic litany of conflicts over the past 20 years that bear out this deficiency. The case best known to me is that of the “Yugoslav wars” (1991–1995). They constitute the clearest example of the yawning gap between the law itself and the degree to which it is implemented. What is even more worrying is that all of this is taking place in a world where the demise of “totalitarianism” has left the world with what is, for all practical purposes, a single centre of power. This centre comprises those States which, since the International Peace Conference held in 1899 in The Hague, have been inspired by their democratic traditions and their attachment to human rights and the rule of law to play a leading role in developing, affirming and reaffirming what today constitutes international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts. I therefore believe that this divergence between the letter of the law and the conduct of those responsible for implementing it results from a lack of determination on the part of governments to “ensure respect” for that law throughout the world. I am in no doubt whatsoever that they have sufficiently efficacious means at their disposal to do so. What is missing, unfortunately, is the political will.

Prospects for United States Ratification of Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions

1991 ◽  
Vol 85 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
George H. Aldrich
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Military

Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, concluded in Geneva in 1977, is the most important treaty codifying and developing international humanitarian law since the adoption of the four Conventions themselves; and it is the first such treaty since 1907 to deal with methods and means of warfare and the protection of the civilian population from the effects of warfare. As such, its contributions to the law were long overdue and, on the whole, are both positive from the humanitarian point of view and practicable from the military point of view. Moreover, it offers the prospect of improved compliance with international humanitarian law, which would greatly benefit the victims of war and would bring the law in action closer to the law in the books. Yet, in January 1987, the President of the United States informed the Senate that he would not submit the Protocol to the Senate for its advice and consent to ratification, calling it “fundamentally and irreconcilably flawed.” It is apparent that President Reagan’s decision resulted from misguided advice that exaggerated certain flaws in the Protocol, ignored the statements of understanding that would have remedied them, and misconstrued a humanitarian and antiterrorist instrument as one that could give aid and comfort to “terrorists.”

Internal (Non-International) Armed Conflict

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric David
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law ◽  
Internal Armed Conflicts

The law of armed conflict previously applied only to international armed conflicts. Today, internal armed conflicts are regulated by Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, along with an increasing number of provisions. The second Additional Protocol of 1977 (AP II) to the 1949 GC contains 18 substantive provisions devoted entirely to non-international armed conflicts (NIACs). This chapter discusses the variety and complexity of international humanitarian law rules applicable to NIACs and the criteria used for identifying the existence of a NIAC. It considers how the nature of hostilities and the quality of the actors are used as defining criteria to distinguish an armed conflict from banditry, terrorism, and short rebellions.

Parties to Non-International Armed Conflicts under International Treaty Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tilman Rodenhäuser
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Armed Group ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Treaty Law ◽  
Treaty Interpretation

Chapter 2 examines international humanitarian law treaties. Using classical treaty interpretation methods, it establishes what degree of organization is required from a non-state armed group to become ‘Party to the conflict’ under article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions, or an ‘organized armed group’ under article 1(1) of the Additional Protocol II or under the ICC Statute. Chapter 2 also analyses the travaux préparatoires of the different treaties, subsequent practice, and engages with the main doctrinal debates surrounding these questions. By subjecting the three treaties to thorough analysis, the chapter presents concise interpretations of the relevant organizational requirements, and compares the different thresholds. It also identifies and addresses under-researched questions, such as whether the organization criterion under international humanitarian law requires the capacity to implement the entirety of the applicable law.

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.

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”.

Protection and Nurses

1977 ◽  
Vol 17 (195) ◽  
pp. 299-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Sandoz
Keyword(s):  
Medical Personnel ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Additional Protection ◽  
The Law

The fourth and last session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts has just opened. The Conference is considering two Protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. The first widens the scope of humanitarian law applicable in international armed conflicts, in particular by giving additional protection to civilians even when they are not in the enemy's power, and by extending to civilian medical personnel the protection which until now had been granted only to military medical personnel. The second Protocol develops the law applicable in non-international armed conflicts, which until now was restricted to a few principles contained in common article 3 of the four Conventions of 1949.

scholarly journals SCOPE OF THE APPLICATION OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW (IHL) IN SITUATIONS OF NON-INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICTS: EXTENDED APPLICABILITY OF COMMON ARTICLE.3

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-105
Author(s):  
Dr. Faiz Bakhsh ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Special Reference ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Complex Phenomenon ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
International Conflicts ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Geneva Conventions

The applicability of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in non-international conflicts is a complex phenomenon due to the undefined and unannounced nature of non-international armed conflicts. International Humanitarian Law extends its applicability to the armed conflicts of non-international nature between state and non-state armed groups or between non-state armed groups. Common article.3 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and 1977 Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, provide criteria for the applicability of IHL However, the states are often seen reluctant to accept international legal oversight into their internal matters and this phenomenon of violence often need to be identified and defined. This paper investigates the scope of the application of International Humanitarian Law in situations of non-international armed conflicts, mainly focussing on the extended applicability of common article.3 to the Geneva Conventions 1949, in situation of non-international armed conflicts. Various types and nature of armed conflicts, the applicability of International Humanitarian Law to non-international conflicts are discussed with special reference to the scope and applicability of Common Article.3 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. Moreover, the binding force and territorial scope of common article.3 are discussed in a broader context as to assess the applicability of International Humanitarian Law on the changing nature of the non-international armed conflicts.

scholarly journals Death of two eminent members of the Movement

1988 ◽  
Vol 28 (267) ◽  
pp. 558-559
Keyword(s):  
Police Officer ◽  
Air Force ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
The Law ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Do So

The ICRC learned with deep sadness of the death on 24 September 1988 of General Pietro Verri, President of the Florence Branch of the Italian Red Cross, and the death on 16 October 1988 of Mr. Soehanda Ijas, Co-Chairman of the Indonesian Red Cross.General Verri, former Vice-Commander of the Arma dei Carabinieri, was an active supporter of the Red Cross and a tireless champion of international humanitarian law (IHL), a subject in which he was well versed. He was a member of the Italian delegation to the Diplomatic Conference which led, in 1977, to the adoption of the Protocols additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and as a profilic author and translator did much to promote the dissemination of IHL in his country. He drew his ability to do so from a flawless knowledge of the theoretical questions underlying the law of armed conflicts, coupled with a vast experience of the practical problems arising from the implementation of these rules. For several years he also acted as director of the courses set up by the Italian Red Cross to train instructors of humanitarian law and regularly taught the law of armed conflicts to members of the Air Force and Police Officer Academies.

Twenty-five Years after the Adoption of Additional Protocol II: Breakthrough or Failure of Humanitarian Legal Protection?

2001 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 129-166
Author(s):  
Heike Spieker
Keyword(s):  
Legal Protection ◽  
International Community ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Civilian Population ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Internal Armed Conflicts

On 12 December 2002, the international community celebrated the twenty-fifth anniversary of the opening for signature of 1977 Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts. In view of today's armed hostilities around the globe, this anniversary raises the questions whether international humanitarian law provides substantive regulation protecting civilians in non-international armed conflicts; whether such legal protection is effectively countering the sufferings of the civilian population and what are now the main challenges for the international communityvis-à-visinternal armed conflicts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document