International Environmental Protection in Armed Conﬂicts: Traditional Legal Regulation and Interpretation Novelties

Humanitarian Law ◽

Wide Range

The paper is devoted to international legal protection of the environment during armed conflicts. The author emphasizes that armed conflicts, both international and non-international, continue to be one of the most serious threats to a healthy environment. An armed conflict taking place in the environment invariably poses a threat to ecosystems.The author summarizes that in international law there are special norms for the protection of natural environment during armed conflicts. At the same time, increasing the level of protection requires a clearer definition of the scope of application of customary law and the further development of treaty rules. While the objectives of protecting the natural environment are linked to the survival and protection of civilians, recognition of environmental protection during armed conflict as such constitutes an important trend. International law calls on States to enter into agreements that provide for additional protection of the natural environment during armed conflicts. The concept of “protecting the natural environment” in international humanitarian law refers to a wide range of obligations that can help protect the natural environment or its parts from damage. A high threshold for potential harm continues to pose the risk that such protection is not fully applicable in practice. There is an obvious tendency to use the potential of the principles of international environmental law when applying the norms of international humanitarian law. Thus, even in cases where the assessment of new means and methods of warfare does not provide scientific certainty with regard to their impact on the natural environment, this does not absolve the parties to the conflict from taking appropriate precautions. It is not enough that there are important rules of international humanitarian law protecting the natural environment during armed conflict; they need to be better disseminated, implemented and enforced, as well as validated and clarified.

The Protection of the Environment in Armed Conflict: Legal Obligations in the Absence of Specific Rules

Nordic Journal of International Law ◽

10.1163/15718107-08201002 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 82 (1) ◽

pp. 7-20 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Dieter Fleck

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Natural Environment ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

General Rule ◽

Legal Regulation ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Military Operations ◽

Post Conflict

While a general rule of ‘eco-protection’ in armed conflict may be derived from the basic principles of distinction, proportionality, avoidance of unnecessary suffering and humanity, international humanitarian law provides little by way of more specific rules for the protection of the natural environment except for in extreme situations that can rarely be expected to occur. Nevertheless, opinio juris has changed since the adoption of pertinent instruments in 1977. This development needs to be balanced against a still prevailing general reluctance to accept specific ecological obligations and procedures in military operations. Thus a detailed evaluation of planning and decision-making processes appears necessary. Revisiting the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea and the ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law, this article argues that certain qualifications made in these documents relating to requirements of ‘imperative military necessity’ are to be assessed in the light of their specific implications and should be used with caution. Furthermore, it is suggested that pertinent consequences of the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Effects of Armed Conflicts on Treaties deserve further study. To this end, interdisciplinary case studies should be conducted to support fact-oriented evaluations of military requirements, ecological assessments and political effects post-conflict, rather than insisting on thresholds for legal regulation that already appeared to be escapist decades ago and which may prove counter-productive in the years to come. New activities aimed at protecting the natural environment in armed conflict should focus on a reaffirmation of existing rules and their effective implementation.

The Protection of the Natural Environment in Armed Conflict – Existing Rules and Need for Further Legal Protection

Nordic Journal of International Law ◽

10.1163/15718107-08201003 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 82 (1) ◽

pp. 21-52 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Cordula Droege ◽

Marie-Louise Tougas

Keyword(s):

Natural Environment ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Environmental Law ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

International Human Rights Law ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

International Environmental Law ◽

General Rules

Considerable research has been conducted, particularly since the Iraq-Kuwait war of 1991, on the legal protection of the environment in armed conflicts. Much of this research has focused either on the specific protections provided in international humanitarian law (IHL), or on the applicability of international environmental law to situations of armed conflict. Rather than focusing on these specific provisions, this article seeks to examine the general protections under IHL, in particular the characterisation of the natural environment as a civilian object and the legal protection flowing from this characterisation – namely the general rules on the conduct of hostilities. After addressing these general rules, it briefly recalls some other relevant provisions of IHL before turning to possible avenues to strengthen the legal protection of the environment in armed conflict by clarifying or further developing IHL in this respect, taking into account the protection provided by international human rights law and international environmental law.

Protection of the Environment in Times of Non-international Armed Conflicts – a Gap to be Filled in

Studia Iuridica ◽

10.5604/01.3001.0013.2160 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 78 ◽

pp. 184-198

Author(s):

Maria Magdalena Kenig-Witkowska

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Environmental Protection ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Environmental Law ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Legal Regulations ◽

International Conflicts ◽

Law Of Armed Conflict

Environmental protection in times of non-international armed conflicts is not subject to the sectoral or particular protection categories of environmental law and to date it has not been comprehensively regulated by international law. Except for generalities, it was also ignored in the 1992 Rio Declaration Principle 24 of which is not unambiguous in its expression. In fact, only the international humanitarian law of armed conflict contains norms which address the natural environment in times of armed conflicts. On the basis of a review of legal acts addressing the issues of environmental protection in times of non-international conflicts, negative conclusions de lege lata can be drawn as part of an attempt to answer the question whether international law ensures sufficient environmental protection in such circumstances. In the Author’s opinion, in international law there is a gap relating to the protection of the environment in times of non-international armed conflicts; the existing legal regulations which could be applied in these matters have a rudimentary characters.

Ten questions to Philip Spoerri, ICRC Director for International Law and Cooperation

10.1017/s1816383113000477 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 94 (887) ◽

pp. 1125-1134 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

International Committee ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Red Cross ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Republic Of The Congo ◽

The One

With the globalisation of market economies, business has become an increasingly prominent actor in international relations. It is also increasingly present in situations of armed conflict. On the one hand, companies operating in volatile environments are exposed to violence and the consequences of armed conflicts. On the other hand, some of their conduct in armed conflict may lead to violations of the law.The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) engages with the private sector on humanitarian issues, with the aim of ensuring compliance or clarifying the obligations that business actors have under international humanitarian law (IHL) and encouraging them to comply with the commitments they have undertaken under various international initiatives to respect IHL and human rights law.In times of conflict, IHL spells out certain responsibilities and rights for all parties involved. Knowledge of the relevant rules of IHL is therefore critical for local and international businesses operating in volatile contexts. In this Q&A section, Philip Spoerri, ICRC Director for International Law and Cooperation, gives an overview of the rules applicable to business actors in situations of conflict, and discusses some of the ICRC's engagement with business actors.Philip Spoerri began his career with the ICRC in 1994. Following a first assignment in Israel and the occupied and autonomous territories, he went on to be based in Kuwait, Yemen, Afghanistan, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In Geneva, he headed the legal advisers to the Department of Operations. He returned to Afghanistan as head of the ICRC delegation there from 2004 to 2006, when he took up his current position. Before joining the ICRC, he worked as a lawyer in a private firm in Munich. He holds a PhD in law from Bielefeld University and has also studied at the universities of Göttingen, Geneva, and Munich.

PREVENT ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE DURING ARMED CONFLICT

BRICS Law Journal ◽

10.21684/2412-2343-2018-5-2-72-99 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 5 (2) ◽

pp. 72-99

Author(s):

Z. M. Jaffal ◽

W. F. Mahameed

Keyword(s):

Armed Conflict ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Cultural Property ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Red Cross ◽

Environmental Damage ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Protection Method ◽

Enforcement Mechanisms

International humanitarian law consists of different rules that are used for protecting people and restricting the methods of warfare. The application of international humanitarian law is not only limited to the protection of victims related to armed conflicts during the outbreak of hostilities; however, it is also helpful for protecting the victims of these conflicts, including environment. The legal rules for the protection of environment in armed conflict also provide legal protection for the environment during the outbreak of hostilities. The study is divided into several sections, starting from environmental damage in the context of warfare. Afterward, the study discusses the importance of preventive measures in armed conflicts. Furthermore, the properties of prevention protection of environment are discussed including cultural property, engineering installations and protected areas near hospitals and safety zones. The study has shown positive consequences of preventive protection method in both the conduct and the outbreak of hostilities. A set of mechanisms or legal procedures is imposed under humanitarian conventions to provide preventive protection to the environment. The principles of humanitarian law have been developed and enforced through the actions of the Red Cross. However, proved nonetheless to be insufficient to prevent environmental destruction. Principally, the enforcement mechanisms hindered the effectiveness of the provisions. In contrast, several conditions for the possibility of registering cultural property in the international register of cultural should be encouraged based on special prevention mechanisms so that the humanitarian conventions can take serious considerations towards it.

Commission I: War victims and respect for international humanitarian law

10.1017/s0020860400073344 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 36 (310) ◽

pp. 36-42

Keyword(s):

New York ◽

United Nations ◽

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

International Conference ◽

War Victims

Commission I, which was chaired by H.E. Ambassador Hisashi Owada, Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations in New York, had two main items on its agenda: discussion of the follow-up to the 1993 International Conference for the Protection of War Victims held in Geneva and action to be taken in that regard by the 26th International Conference, and examination of a number of humanitarian issues relating to the protection of the civilian population in times of armed conflict. The Commission also took note of the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea.

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

10.1017/s1816383115000788 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 96 (895-896) ◽

pp. 1195-1224 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Ezequiel Heffes ◽

Marcos D. Kotlik

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

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.

The legal protection of persons living under the control of non-State armed groups

10.1017/s1816383121000205 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-30

Author(s):

Tilman Rodenhäuser

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Social Services ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Human Rights Law ◽

Armed Groups ◽

Rebel Governance

Abstract In recent non-international armed conflicts in countries such as the Central African Republic, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, South Sudan, Syria, Ukraine and Yemen, various non-State armed groups (NSAGs) have exercised control over territory and people living therein. In many cases, and for a variety of reasons, NSAGs perform some form of governance in these territories, which can include the maintenance of order or the provision of justice, health care, or social services. The significance of such measures became particularly apparent when in 2020 not only governments but also armed groups took steps to halt the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines key legal issues that arise in these contexts. First, it analyzes the extent to which international humanitarian law protects the life and dignity of persons living under the control of NSAGs, rebutting doubts as to whether this field of international law has a role in regulating what is sometimes called “rebel governance”. Second, it provides a brief overview of aspects of the lives of people in armed group-controlled territory that are addressed by international humanitarian law and aspects that instead fall into the realm of human rights law. Third, the article discusses whether and to what extent human rights law can be said to bind NSAGs as a matter of law and flags issues that need further attention in current and future debates.

REVISITING THE BIPOLAR DISTINCTION IN THE CHARACTERISATION OF ARMED CONFLICTS

Pretoria Student Law Review ◽

10.29053/pslr.v4i.2152 ◽

2010 ◽

Author(s):

W Ochieng

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

International Law ◽

Armed Conflict ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Geneva Conventions ◽

Traditional Understanding

Since the Geneva Conventions, the architecture of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) has been founded upon a distinction between international armed conflict and non-international armed conflict. Today, this claim stands to be revisited since international and non-international armed conflicts are no longer strict organising frameworks for the categorisation of rules of armed conflicts. This is seen in that over fifty years ago, when the four Geneva Conventions were negotiated, the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention were the cornerstones of international law and while their force today is still apparent, the interdependence of states, and global concerns such as terrorism and the commission of widespread human rights violations have eroded the traditional inviolability of borders. The dichotomy in humanitarian law is as implausible today as it is also fundamentally unworkable given the current conditions of conflicts. This dualist conception is no longer adequate to deal with current features of armed conflict, which do not fit neatly into the two categories and frequently contain mixed elements which thus make the task of classification highly complex. The codification of customary rules of international humanitarian law has narrowed the grounds on which the distinctions are predicated. In addition, the two regimes apply simultaneously on multiple situations. Moreover, the question of contemporary armed conflicts raises serious doubts as to whether the traditional understanding of international law still suffices to explain the complexities of modern day armed conflicts. This essay seeks to offer a different perspective on armed conflicts by suggesting a systematic rethinking of the categorisation of conflict. It argues that some of the dilemmas of contemporary conflicts may be attenuated by a new conceptualisation of this bipolar distinction namely a need for a unitary conception of armed conflict.

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 ◽

The United Nations

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.