Legal Management of Internal War: The 1977 Protocol on Non-International Armed Conflicts

1978 ◽  
Vol 72 (2) ◽  
pp. 272-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P. Forsythe
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Human Values ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
World War ◽  
Geneva Conventions

At the Diplomatic Conference on Humanitarian Law held in Geneva from 1974 to 1977, it was pointed out that eighty percent of the victims of armed conflict since World War II have been created in noninternational armed conflict. Whatever the precision of this estimate, as of the mid-1970’s a number of important actors in world affairs were concerned about destruction of human values in internal war and sought restraints on that form of violence. This concern produced, as of June 10, 1977, a Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 relating to the protection of victims of noninternational armed conflict.

scholarly journals Enforceability Of International Humanitarian Law In Armed Conflict at Present

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lina Hastuti
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
World War ◽  
Additional Protocol ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
New Type

The tendency of the current conflict is a new type of conflict, which is not regulated by international humanitarian law. After World War II, in any war, emphasize the protection of victims of war and an obligation to be responsible for violations of international law or international humanitarian law. The purpose this research is to explore the theories or the law resources in International Humanitarian Law to facing a new type of armed conflict.  It is also significant to know where the discovered principles international humanitarian law about the problem. Based on Martens Clause and 1977 Additional Protocol I and II or Si Omnes Clause and Common Articles 2 Geneva Conventions 1949 can applied in new type of armed conflicts. As the development of international humanitarian law which always follow the development of the international community, to address issues related to a new type of armed conflict, it can be back to the theories and legal resources in international humanitarian law. Keywords: Armed Conflict, International Humanitarian Law

The Prevention of Environmental Damage in Time of Armed Conflict: Proportionality and Precautionary Measures

2000 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 109-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Desgagné
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Weapons Of Mass Destruction ◽  
Environmental Damage ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Scant Attention ◽  
Precautionary Measures ◽  
Potential Damage ◽  
Nuclear Warfare

The law of war historically paid scant attention to the protection of the environment. Its main focus was to regulate hostilities so as protect combatants from unnecessary injury. Since World War II, it has turned to the protection of the civilian population and individual civilians. It does not follow that the environment did not receive any protection at all. In as much as international humanitarian law places constraints on the use of means and methods of warfare, the environment was indirectly protected. Thus, the provisions of the Hague or the Geneva Conventions, through the protection of civilian property and objects, offer indirect protection of the environment. Similarly, the banning of weapons of mass destruction, such as biological and chemical weapons, or the restraints on activities related to nuclear warfare, such as the testing of nuclear weapons, also ultimately limit potential damage to the environment caused by armed conflicts.

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.

Children of State Police Offi cers and Soldiers of the Polish Army in NKVD Special Camps

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-213
Author(s):  
Maryla Fałdowska
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Special Treatment ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
World War ◽  
Protection Measures

The article presents issues concerning juvenile prisoners of three special camps in Kozielsk, Starobielsk and Ostashkov. The author draws attention to the lack of definition of the legal status of minors after 1918, and thus — the lack of provisions on ensuring the safety of children in the international standards governing the treatment of prisoners of war in force during World War II and internal legal acts of the Soviet Union. The article emphasizes that the participation of children in armed conflicts was regulated as late as ten years after the outbreak of World War II in international humanitarian law, adopting on 12 August 1949 “The Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War” (Fourth Geneva Convention), under which children are entitled to special treatment or protection measures. The provisions of conventions protecting children during the war included, among others, regulations concerning the creation of special zones and sanitary facilities, evacuation from the besieged zone, provision of necessary food and clothing, provision of medical and hospital care, education or transfer to a neutral country. The author notes that the Fourth Geneva Convention does not contain a provision on special protection and care for juveniles, and that children during warfare are classified exclusively as civilian population. The circumstances of the Soviet captivity of minors after September 17, 1939, their stay in and leaving the camps, the reasons for selection, after which they were left alive and not included in the “death transports”, described in the article, make it possible to determine the number of rescued and murdered.

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”.

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.

San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea

1995 ◽  
Vol 35 (309) ◽  
pp. 595-637 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Institute ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Law Of Armed Conflict ◽  
The Law ◽  
Naval Operations

The San Remo Manual was prepared during the period 1988–1994 by a group of legal and naval experts participating in their personal capacity in a series of Round Tables convened by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law. The purpose of the Manual is to provide a contemporary restatement of international law applicable to armed conflicts at sea. The Manual includes a few provisions which might be considered progressive developments in the law but most of its provisions are considered to state the law which is currently applicable. The Manual is viewed by the participants of the Round Tables as being in many respects a modern equivalent to the Oxford Manual on the Laws of Naval War Governing the Relations Between Belligerents adopted by the Institute of International Law in 1913. A contemporary manual was considered necessary because of developments in the law since 1913 which for the most part have not been incorporated into recent treaty law, the Second Geneva Convention of 1949 being essentially limited to the protection of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked at sea. In particular, there has not been a development for the law of armed conflict at sea similar to that for the law of armed conflict on land with the conclusion of Protocol I of 1977 additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. Although some of the provisions of Additional Protocol I affect naval operations, in particular those supplementing the protection given to medical vessels and aircraft in the Second Geneva Convention of 1949, Part IV of the Protocol, which protects civilians against the effects of hostilities, is applicable only to naval operations which affect civilians and civilian objects on land.

scholarly journals REVISITING THE BIPOLAR DISTINCTION IN THE CHARACTERISATION OF ARMED CONFLICTS

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
W Ochieng
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document