Whether Ihl Outlaws Terrorist Acts In Both International And Non-International Armed Conflict; And Addresses Counter- Terrorism Measures?

Abstract

This article an attempt to identify legal rules which can be applicable to the members of terrorist networks and groups. It also dilates upon the right or wrong application of available International Laws-of-war to combat terrorism in both International and non-international armed conflicts; the situations which have not been adequately contemplated by International agreements in such laws; and the imminent circumstances, if any, for initiating reforms in these laws in order to address contemporary legal issues to fight terrorism; inasmuch as many countries, with different legal contexts, are either instigating or have started military actions, like the one in Afghanistan by military coalition. A section of critics believes that no such use of force against terrorist groups is legal unless resorted to in self defence and sufficient evidence is required to arrest them for an alleged violation of law. It might also lead to the inference that captured terrorists can claim Miranda rights of silence and demand legal assistance of a lawyer, which may prevent interrogation in regard to future terrorist activities. To answer these questions, the nexus of “jus in bello” with “terrorism” assume greater significance to help analyse fresh approach to alike International Armed Conflicts (IAC) and Non- international Armed Conflicts (NIAC).