Abstract

This article explores the relationship between the laws of armed conflict, or international humanitarian law (IHL), and the international legal concept of State sovereignty. Historically, only wars between sovereign States were subject to regulation by the laws of war. From the 19th century onwards, States agreed upon a significant number of IHL treaties and in 1949, despite calls upon sovereignty, they accepted that international law can also regulate non-international armed conflicts by extending a limited part of the IHL rules to this type of conflict. Since then, through the formation of customary international law and, in part, as result of new treaties, it has been accepted that the majority of IHL rules have become applicable to armed conflicts of a non-international character. In addition, international institutions have been set up to prosecute individuals for serious violations of IHL. The author discusses how IHL and sovereignty have influenced each other’s development. The analysis shows that the development of IHL must not be seen as limiting State sovereignty, but rather ought to be regarded as a manifestation of sovereignty, expressed through the formation of this branch of international law by its core subjects: States. At the same time, as a result of the increased reliance on means other than treaties for clarification and development of IHL, the role of States has become more limited; it is reduced to either accepting or rejecting the prospective developments of IHL and any consequential impact on their sovereignty.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call