Odpowiedzialność za naruszenie międzynarodowego prawa humanitarnego przez siły pokojowe Organizacji Narodów Zjednoczonych

Humanitarian Law ◽

Peacekeeping Operations ◽

Lethal Force ◽

The Subject ◽

The United Nations ◽

Traditional Understanding

Operations under the auspices of the Security Council mandate span over 70 years. Repeatedly involved in resolving armed conflicts, they have made a significant contribution to ensuring security and stability around the world. In practice, they have taken the form of operations by individual states, coalitions, other international organizations or simply as United Nations missions composed of contingents provided by Troop Contribution Countries (TCC). While operations under the auspices of the United Nations have been involved on several occasions in offensive activities under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and the question of responsibility for these actions has been the subject of many legal analyses and judgments, missions organized by the United Nations are always recognized as neutral, and their activities as conciliatory and focused on monitoring the cessation of hostilities, or supervising the disengagement between the parties of the conflict, with the use of force limited to self-defence. Thus, such operations benefited from legal protection, and any action against them was considered a violation of international law. The current engagement of United Nations goes far beyond the traditional understanding of peacekeeping operations. UN missions are frequently authorized to employ all necessary means, up to and including the use of lethal force or even neutralization of the armed group. This creates a situation where in the light of International Humanitarian Law, such actions can be recognized as involvement in armed conflict. This article is intended to show the problems that the international community will soon face to in using United Nations’ missions as an instrument for resolving armed conflicts and as a tool for restoring peace and providing stability and securityin the area of operations. It presents the processes of decision-making and subordination, which in some circumstances might result in the United Nations missions being deprived of legal protection and, in addition, made liable for non-compliance with the provisions of International Humanitarian Law.

The application of humanitarian law by the armed forces of the United Nations Organization

10.1017/s0020860400066080 ◽

1978 ◽

Vol 18 (206) ◽

pp. 274-284 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Yves Sandoz

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Armed Forces ◽

Armed Force ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

The events in Lebanon and the despatch of a UN armed force to keep the peace there brings into focus a problem which cannot be ignored, the application of international humanitarian law in armed conflicts. This problem has two aspects:— What is the nature of the armed forces which the UN commits or can commit at the present time?— To what extent are these armed forces obliged to apply humanitarian law?

UN Peacekeeping Operations: Applicability of International Humanitarian Law and Responsibility for Operations-Related Damage

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.2307/2555303 ◽

2000 ◽

Vol 94 (2) ◽

pp. 406-412 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Daphna Shraga

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

International Committee ◽

Red Cross ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Peacekeeping Operations ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

Un Peacekeeping ◽

The United Nations ◽

First Time

In the five decades that followed the Korea operation, where for the first time the United Nations commander agreed, at the request of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to abide by the humanitarian provisions of the Geneva Conventions, few UN operations lent themselves to the applicability of international humanitarian law

Human Rights and Protocol II

10.1017/s0020860400069321 ◽

1983 ◽

Vol 23 (236) ◽

pp. 246-254 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Sylvie Junod

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

United Nations ◽

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Human Beings ◽

Human rights, particularly civil and political, have influenced the latest developments in international humanitarian law, especially 1977 Protocol II relating to non-international armed conflicts. At the Teheran Conference in 1968 the United Nations began to reconcile these two branches of international law; it was at this Conference that international humanitarian law was first called “human rights in periods of armed conflict”. This rapprochement was helped further by the adoption in the 1977 Protocols of some basic rules identical to those in the Human Rights Conventions; it helps strengthen the protection of human beings in situations of armed conflict.

Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts: Conference of Red Cross Experts

10.1017/s0020860400023809 ◽

1971 ◽

Vol 11 (121) ◽

pp. 193-206

Keyword(s):

The Netherlands ◽

United Nations ◽

International Committee ◽

Secretary General ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Red Cross ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

The Hague ◽

On 1 March 1971, the Conference of Red Cross experts on the reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflict opened at the Peace Palace in The Hague. The Conference, of which the significance was explained in our March issue, and which continued until 6 March, was convened by the International Committee of the Red Cross and organized with the valuable co-operation of the Netherlands Red Cross Society. Sixty-nine delegates, representing 34 National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, participated in the session.The opening meeting, under the Chairmanship of the Jonkheer Kraijenhoff, President of the Netherlands Red Cross Society, took place in the main hall of the International Court of Justice, in the presence of H.E. Mr. C. H. F. Polak, Minister of Justice, Mr. V. G. M. Marijnen, Burgomaster of The Hague, Mr. Marcel A. Naville, President of the ICRC, Mr. Marc Schreiber, Director of the U.N. Human Rights Division, Mr. Nedim Abut, Under Secretary-General of the League of Red Cross Societies, and many diplomatic representativesA number of speakers took the floor. Mr. Marijnen bade the participants welcome; Mr. Schreiber presented the greetings and good wishes of the United Nations Secretary-General, underlining the excellent co-operation between the United Nations and the ICRC. The Presidents of the Netherlands Red Cross and of the ICRC each delivered an address, the main passages of which we reproduce below, not omitting to mention that Mr. Naville expressed the Geneva institution's gratitude to the Netherlands Red Cross which played a determining role in the organizing of the Conference.

Some Aspects of Prisoner-of-war Status According to the Geneva Protocol I of 1977

Israel Law Review ◽

10.1017/s0021223700017647 ◽

1985 ◽

Vol 20 (2-3) ◽

pp. 243-281

Author(s):

Nissim Bar-Yaacov

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Prisoner Of War ◽

The Third ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

The United Nations ◽

First Session

The Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, convened by the Swiss Federal Council, held four sessions in Geneva during the years 1974–1977. On 8 June 1977, the Conference adopted by consensus two Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, the first relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts (Protocol I), and the second relating to the protection of victims of noninternational armed conflicts (Protocol II).The states invited to the Conference were all the states Parties to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and such states non-Parties as were members of the United Nations. 126 states were represented at the first session, 121— at the second, 106—at the third and 109—at the fourth.

Road to Nowhere? The Future for a Declaration on Fundamental Standards of Humanity

Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies ◽

10.1163/18781527-00301002 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 3 (1) ◽

pp. 43-72 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Emily Crawford

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Grey Zone ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

The United Nations ◽

Current Terminology

In the years following the adoption of the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions in 1977, debate emerged regarding the extant lacunae in the international rules relating to armed conflict. It was argued that there were gaps in international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law with regards to so-called ‘grey-zone conflicts’ – armed conflicts that did not reach the minimum threshold of either Protocol II or Common Article 3. Therefore, it was proposed that a declaration outlining the minimum humanitarian standards applicable in all situations of violence and conflict be adopted. By 1990, this debate had crystallised around the Turku Declaration on Minimum Humanitarian Standards. However, progress on the declaration quickly stalled once discussion was moved to the United Nations. Since 1995, there have been nine reports by the Secretary-General on the question of fundamental standards of humanity to use the current terminology. Over the years, the scope and content the fundamental standards of humanity has become clearer, yet the adoption of a document on these fundamental standards is no more imminent than when the issue first moved to the United Nations. This article will therefore examine why and how this apparently vital piece of international policy has stalled.

Applicability of the rules of international humanitarian law to peacekeeping operations in regional crises

The Journal of the National Institute of Justice ◽

10.52277/1857-2405.2021.2(57).04 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 26-32

Author(s):

Alexandru Cauia ◽

◽

Naif Jassim Alabduljabbar ◽

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Point Of View ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Legal Rules ◽

Peacekeeping Operations ◽

Military Conflicts ◽

The Status ◽

The Subject

Reading the International Humanitarian Law, point of view of the status of subjects of Public International Law of the parties ist the only issue that involved in military conflicts matters so that they can be qualified as international or non-international, which depends directly on the volume of legal rules to be enforced and complied by the warring parties. Thus, members of peacekeeping operations conducted under the auspices of the UN, or with the participation of regional structures must strictly comply with the provisions of the rules of war throughout their actions in situations that may qualify as armed conflicts. Mechanisms and instruments for ensuring compliance with the rules of International Humanitarian Law by members of peacekeeping contingents shall be the subject of research in this article.

The Application of International Humanitarian Law to Peacekeepers

Journal of International Peacekeeping ◽

10.1163/18754112-20210004 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 24 (1-2) ◽

pp. 190-222

Author(s):

Thierry Kaiser ◽

Carlijn Ruers

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Legal Framework ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Hostile Environment ◽

Armed Groups ◽

Peacekeeping Operations ◽

Un Peacekeeping ◽

The Status

Abstract Peacekeepers deployed as part of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (minusma) are operating in an increasingly hostile environment, requiring them to use force regularly in order to defend civilians, themselves and, more generally, minusma’s mandate. Over the last few years, minusma’s mandate has been expanded to enable the Mission to address the growing threat posed by hostile armed groups, including terrorist armed groups, and to provide support to counter-terrorist forces. The frequent hostilities, coupled with the Mission’s enhanced “robust” mandate and the rising number of demands made on minusma by non-UN forces for operational and logistical support, have raised questions concerning the status and legal protection of minusma’s peacekeepers under international humanitarian law, and more broadly the adequacy of the legal framework applicable to modern UN peacekeeping operations deployed in a “no peace to keep” environment. This article argues that a clarification of the application of the legal framework is required in order to afford better protection to Mission personnel and to more accurately capture the situation on the ground.

The United Nations as a Party to Armed Conflict

Journal of International Peacekeeping ◽

10.1163/18754112-02003011 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 20 (3-4) ◽

pp. 313-341 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Damian Lilly

Keyword(s):

United Nations ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Legal Status ◽

Legal Framework ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Peacekeeping Operations ◽

Republic Of The Congo ◽

As the role of United Nations peacekeeping operations has evolved in recent decades so too has the legal interpretation of the way in which international humanitarian law (ihl) is viewed as applying to its peacekeepers. While it has been understood that the un could become a party to armed conflict, the organization has never publicly acknowledged this until the establishment of the Intervention Brigade of the of the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (monusco) pursuant to Security Council resolution 2098 of March 2013. This article addresses the legal consequences of the Intervention Brigade as a party to armed conflict and the insights it provides into the legal status of un peacekeeper under ihl. In particular, it will argue that the established legal framework for un peacekeeping operations as having the protected status of civilians under ihl has proved ill-suited for the Intervention Brigade and its experience has highlighted the inconsistencies and gaps in the rules that have been developed.

Diplomatic Conference on the reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts

10.1017/s0020860400018404 ◽

1975 ◽

Vol 15 (167) ◽

pp. 86-87

Keyword(s):

Nongovernmental Organizations ◽

United Nations ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

The World ◽

The United Nations ◽

Swiss Government

On 20 February 1974, the Diplomatic Conference convened by the Swiss Government opened in Geneva. It was attended by the plenipotentiaries of 118 States parties to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and members of the United Nations, and by representatives of numerous international, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations. The Conference examined the two draft Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions which the ICRC had prepared with the assistance of experts from countries all over the world, for the purpose of supplementing international humanitarian law in view of the development of conflicts. Since armed conflicts, unhappily, break out from time to time and the forms and techniques of warfare develop, it has become necessary to adapt the Geneva Conventions to present-day circumstances.