Distinction and Loss of Civilian Protection in International Armed Conflicts

Abstract

T are several cardinal principles lying at root of law of international armed conflict. Upon examination, none is more critical than principle of distinction. Undeniably, this overarching precept constitutes an integral part of modern customary intem ational 1aw.2 lt is also reflected in Article 48 of 1977 Protocol I Additional to Geneva Conventions ofl949. entitled Bask rule, which provides that the Parties to conflict shall at all times distinguish between civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives. 3 As is dear from text, pivotal bifurcation is between civilians and combatants (and, as a corollary, between military objectives and civilian objects). It is wrong to present dichotomy, as International Committee of Red Cross (ICRC) sometimes does,4 in form of civilians versus members of armed forces. $ Apart from fact that not every member of anned forces is a combatant (medical and religious personnel are excluded),6 civilians who directly participate in hostilities lose their civilian status fo r such time as they are acting in this fashion although they are not members of any anned forces (see infra Section B) .