Humanitarian Law Research Articles

Through the Lens of the ICJ: Bridging the Gap between Human Rights and Humanitarian Norms in Global Child Soldiering

Recently in June 2022, the United Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict expressed that the ongoing use and recruitment of children in armed conflict globally warrants "international concern". Notwithstanding the existence of proscriptive norms in terms of international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL), international legal violations are nevertheless committed by states and non-state actors. A systematic analysis of the respective normative systems identifies a lacuna between specific provisions thereof. Consequently, violations are committed in armed conflicts for the purposes of IHRL but not IHL, it is contended that this inconsistency in the law perpetuates ongoing child soldiering. It is further contended that this inconsistency establishes a genus of children who are legally unprotected as they fall between the cracks of international law. Based on recent progressive jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice, an approach which will bridge the lacuna between these norms is proposed. Contrary to the view of the International Committee of the Red Cross and with due consideration for the lex specialis principle, it is proposed that the IHL and IHRL instruments should apply in a complementary fashion, as opposed to the separate legal regimes under which they have developed.

The Conduct of Hostilities, Attack Effects, and Criminal Accountability

Abstract War crimes related to the decision to carry out attacks during the conduct of hostilities are almost always defined in terms of conduct and not result (Article 8(2)(b) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court). Yet it is common for critiques of such decisions to focus on attack results as proof of their alleged illegality. While such results are probative of compliance or non-compliance with international humanitarian law rules regulating the conduct of hostilities, they should rarely be indisputable. This article addresses the challenge of attaching probative value to attack results when assessing responsibility for alleged war crimes based on allegedly illicit attack decisions.

Horizontal and Vertical Integration of LOAC Into Military Academy Curriculum

Abstract This article signals the need for an integrated approach to curriculum development and implementation with a focus on a group of disciplines related to the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). By highlighting various teaching approaches of LOAC, I argue that there is a risk that LOAC be perceived by many non-legal practitioners, like the cadets, as difficult to grasp, interpreted and corelated with real situations they will face daily in operations, exercises or even during execution of routine peace-time duties. I support the idea that the LOAC, as a horizontal discipline in a military academy curriculum, need to be integrated dynamically, both horizontally (in relation to other operational disciplines) and vertically (along the academic path of a military cadet) into the overall construct of learning the basics of the profession of arms. To operationalise this finding, I propose an integrated educational model that suggests horizontal coordination of the academic schedule and enhanced cooperation among the teaching staff of the relevant disciplines.

The formation of criminal liability for the crime of aggression in international law at the end of the XIX - first half of the XX century

The subject of this study is an act of aggression as a crime, according to the provisions of international criminal and international humanitarian law. The article examines in detail the prerequisites for the formation of legal, in particular, international legal responsibility for the commission of acts of aggression. The author believes that the end of the XIX century became the starting point for the development of legal responsibility for the conduct of aggressive wars, as well as the nature of their conduct. Special attention is paid to the fact that the provisions enshrined in the Charter and the Verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal have become imperative norms of international law in terms of fixing international crimes, as well as the principles of responsibility for their commission. It is separately noted that the verdict of the Tribunal became an act of increased strength of the people against the commission of crimes of aggression. The research methodology includes the use of such methods of legal science as historical, formal legal, systemic, as well as methods of analysis and dialectics. The novelty of this study lies in the fact that the work is a comprehensive detailed study of the process of establishing international criminal responsibility for the crime of aggression in the period from the end of the XIX century to the first half of the XX century. The author analyzes the historical and legal aspects of this process, considering various international documents, agreements and events of that time. The special contribution of the author of the study is expressed in the fact that based on an extensive analysis, the author, through the prism of legal doctrines, international norms and historical reality of the time period under consideration, draws conclusions about what factors influenced the development of understanding of the crime of aggression and why the legal status of criminal responsibility in this area began to form at that time.

Targeting Russian Oil Refineries

Abstract In March 2024, Ukraine significantly intensified its assaults on Russian energy infrastructures, deploying a multitude of long-range drones to hit Russia’s largest refineries. This led to a temporary halt in production at several of these facilities. The primary objective of these assaults was to diminish Russia’s military capacity. On the other hand, these actions inflicted damage on the Russian economy. Targeting refineries and oil depots has emerged as a contentious issue. The classification of refineries and oil depots as military objectives is legally not precise. These facilities are seen as essential infrastructure for the nation’s economy and machinery of war. Targeting oil depots or works and installations containing dangerous forces during an international armed conflict could result in significant environmental damage, raising questions about the principles of military necessity, distinction and proportionality. An attack must not cause excessive incidental civilian damage relative to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. This essay will explore the legal issues regarding targeting refineries and oil depots and a comprehensive analysis of the situation within the framework of International Humanitarian Law.

Principle of Distinction in Cyber Warfare

Abstract Principle of distinction, one of the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law dictates, that participants in hostilities at all times distinguish between civilian objects and military objectives, as well as between civilians and combatants. This article addresses the adequacy of the protection offered by the principle in the cyber domain. Great reliance of militaries on civilian cyberinfrastructure expands the range of military objectives to the systems which key civilian activities depend on. There are many unknowns in fulfilling even the simple conditions for the combatant status, as well as in regulation of civilian direct participation in hostilities.

Briefly Noted

On December 19, 2023, the Svea Court of Appeal in Sweden issued its judgment in the above case affirming the conviction and sentencing of Hossein Seyed Ahmadi, an Iranian citizen, for grave breaches of international humanitarian law and murder that took place in Iran in 1988. Specifically, he was charged with having executed prisoners associated with the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran in the Gohardasht prison. Though the Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction of grave breaches of IHL with regard to some of the prisoners at issue, it found overall that the district court was correct in holding that the prosecutor substantiated the charges levied against Ahmadi. With regard to the murder charge, the Court of Appeal affirmed and noted that it should actually have been considered several acts of murder instead of just one single act. One judge dissented and argued that the defendant should have been found guilty of aiding and abetting murder rather than murder itself. The Court of Appeal also agreed with the district court's assessment that the acts took place in relation to the conflict between Iran and Iraq, thus triggering the application of IHL. Ahmadi's sentence to life in prison stands, and damages have been awarded to surviving plaintiffs and relatives of the deceased prisoners.

International Humanitarian Law Study of the Protection of the Rohingya Community in Indonesia

International Humanitarian Law Study of the Protection of the Rohingya Community in Indonesia

Protection of Civilians in International Humanitarian Law

This paper will discusse the historical development of the protection of civilians in international humanitarian law and summarizes the importance of the protection of civilians in international humanitarian law. The paper then analyses specific international humanitarian law measures for the protection of civilians, as well as problems in the identification of civilians and dilemmas in armed struggle. The paper suggests that the international community must further clarify the requirements for protecting civilians under international humanitarian law to effectively implement.

International Law in the Perspective of International Relations

Before discussing the meaning of international law, it is important to know that law is divided into two large groups, private law and public law. However, the terms these two large groups are better known as international law and international private law. The difference between the two is in the objects they regulate. International law is the law that regulates relations between countries and other legal subjects. International law can be defined as the law that regulates international scale entities. Initially, the definition of international law was only defined as law that regulates behavior and relations between countries. However, in its development, the meaning of international law has expanded to include the relationship between states and international organizations, the relationship between international organizations and other organizations, the relationship between states and individuals in special contexts, and so on. There are six subjects of international law, namely : states, international organizations, the international red cross, the vatican holy see, rebels and individuals. International Law includes a set of rules and principles established through international treaties, the practices of states, as well as legal decisions and interpretations by international institutions. Its aim is to regulate the behavior of states in maintaining peace, managing conflict, promoting cooperation, and protecting human rights. International Law covers various aspects, including the law of war (also known as international humanitarian law), refugee law, maritime law, environmental law, international trade law, international investment law, human rights law, diplomatic law.

Enhanced labour protection for prisoners of war

Abstract The principle of prohibiting forced labour exists in both treaty and customary international law. However, there are limits to this prohibition, in that certain types of forced labour are actually permitted; this is the case for forced labour performed by prisoners of war (PoWs). This paper examines the legal regime applicable to such labour. It starts by setting out the current rules, following a brief historical review. It then explains the shortcomings of those rules, which are open to abuse and are not focused exclusively on the rights and interests of the PoWs, before proposing two possible ways of improving the situation by means of a systemic approach. The first is based on international humanitarian law itself, while the second is based on the complementary relationship between that body of law and international human rights law. Such improvements would give PoWs the right to perform any available work while continuing to require them to carry out work exclusively dedicated to running the PoW camp.

Establishing a practical test for the end of non-international armed conflict

Abstract When do non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) end? Determining the existence of a NIAC requires a detailed, fact-intensive inquiry. Since the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia's seminal decision in the Tadić case, international courts and tribunals have evaluated the existence of NIACs under the Tadić test's two-pronged inquiry into intensity and organization. Although that decision also pronounced that international humanitarian law (IHL) continues to apply until a “peaceful settlement is achieved,” neither international tribunals nor scholars have articulated a comparably widely accepted and well-developed test for determining the end of NIACs. At the same time – and especially since 9/11 – States have increasingly relied on IHL to meet the threat posed by non-State actors, broadening the scope of conflict-related liabilities in armed conflict without conferring the privileges or immunities otherwise inherent in IHL. This one-sided approach twists the purpose of IHL and places members of organized armed groups into legal black holes without temporal limitations, as States resist the termination of “armed conflict” irrespective of the continuing intensity of violence or the level of organization of non-State actors. Ultimately, the current approach gives States broad discretion without appropriate safeguards, which undermines the proper application of human rights and humanitarian principles within conflict and prevents the establishment of a sustainable peace. This paper argues that the most appropriate test for ascertaining the end of a NIAC is one that combines objective consideration of the diminution of organized and intense hostilities below the Tadić threshold with the likelihood that hostilities will not again rise above that threshold. It thus draws from but does not fully endorse the preferred approach of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which focuses on the lasting termination of hostilities,1 while abjuring a general temporal limitation. Although commendable for its effort to avoid the legal uncertainty that attends the revolving conflict classification problem, the ICRC's approach unfortunately tends to encode existing uncertainty surrounding the termination of NIACs and to indistinctly prolong the application of IHL to erstwhile conflict situations. In contrast, the authors suggest that a test for the end of NIAC based on a specific period (five months following the diminution of organized and intense hostilities below the Tadić threshold), subject to an evaluation of the risk that those hostilities may resume, better balances certainty of legal application with the promotion of a return to peace. The authors will employ the facts of diverse case studies, including the FARC in Colombia, the LTTE in Sri Lanka, numerous armed groups in Mali, and the United States with Al-Qaeda, to build a legal standard that courts can use to determine IHL's continuing applicability to an erstwhile armed conflict.

Optional but not qualified: Neutrality, the UN Charter and humanitarian objectives

Abstract Neutral States must abstain from supporting a party to a conflict with military equipment and assistance. This core aspect of the law of neutrality has not changed with the adoption of the UN Charter in 1945, or with the brutal Russian aggression against Ukraine. That said, by reviewing the changes to neutrality law over time, this article finds plausible reasons to believe that neutrality has – for better or worse – become optional for the vast majority of States, which can today opt to be non-belligerent States – i.e., States that are neither neutral nor parties to the armed conflict. All States have to cooperate to bring to an end serious violations of international law, including humanitarian law, and this duty of cooperation has abolished “sitting-still neutrality”, but it does not render neutrality law moot. This reading of “optional but not qualified” neutrality maintains the core neutrality idea of abstaining in military matters. In this article, I argue that views of “obsolete” or “qualified” neutrality are not new at all but depart from well-accepted rules of legal interpretation and raise concerns about double standards. Viewing neutrality as optional but unqualifiable offers greater conceptual clarity, is more honest than alternative views, and comes with advantages for humanitarian action.

System of state measures to fight human rights violations in armed conflict

The article examines the modern challenges of human rights protection during the armed conflict, in particular in the context of the need to introduce the legal regime of martial law, which was introduced due to the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against the sovereign, democratic and legal Ukrainian state. The article focuses on the analysis of critical aspects of the protection of human rights in the context of armed conflict, emphasizing the difficulties arising from an aggressive invasion of a sovereign, democratic, and legal state. Special attention is paid to strategic priorities for the restoration and protection of human rights that have been seriously affected by military actions. The article argues the need for a specific legal framework adapted to the conditions of wartime armed conflict and the key priorities of post-war reconstruction. The article provides a detailed analysis of national legislation and relevant international legal norms and an attempt to identify and recommend effective strategies for strengthening the protection of human rights. Emphasis is placed on the need for legislative changes and reforms that would ensure rights and civil liberties and be consistent with European and international standards, thereby strengthening legal guarantees against potential human rights violations. The article provides a critical review of existing legal gaps that impair the protection of human rights during armed conflicts and discusses the key role of the international community and legal institutions in upholding justice and accountability. In addition, it is proposed to implement innovative legal measures and integrate the norms of international humanitarian law to strengthen the legal infrastructure, which is necessary for the effective restoration and protection of human rights and civil liberties. The article reveals modern scientific and professional discussions, emphasizing the urgent need for active and strategic legal measures that meet European and international standards, ensuring the protection of human rights in the complex conditions of military conflicts.

A Normative Framing of the ‘Foreign Fighter’ in Contemporary Armed Conflicts

With its unsettled conceptualisation, the notion of a foreign fighter has garnered renewed attention this Century due to the large numbers of non-nationals involved in hostilities in places such as Syria and Ukraine. Unsurprisingly, the use of foreign fighters has often drawn strong reactions from adversaries on the receiving end who often term them 'mercenaries' or 'foreign terrorists' and usually assert a right to subject captured foreign fighters to unilateral treatment standards. Some States of origin have also rushed to strip their nationals participating in armed conflicts abroad of their citizenship. In light of this tendency to resort to extra normative approaches, the Paper uses doctrinal research methods to explore the position of foreign fighters under international humanitarian law, as the lex specialis for armed conflicts and human rights law, as appropriate. It advocates that policymakers and legal commentators always view foreign fighters through the prism of relevant legal norms.

Control of compliance with norms of international humanitarian law when using weapons controlled by artificial intelligence

Control of compliance with norms of international humanitarian law when using weapons controlled by artificial intelligence

Beyond retribution: Individual reparations for IHL violations as peace facilitators

Abstract Three decades after the United Nations Security Council invoked its Chapter VII powers to create the ad hoc criminal tribunals, there can be little doubt that the prosecution of individuals responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law (IHL) contributes to restoring and maintaining peace. While there is little doubt that the reparatory function of justice is just as crucial as retribution, under international law today, reparations for IHL violations remain harrowingly insufficient or borderline non-existent. In scholarship and strategic litigation, various attempts have been made to distil an individual right to reparations from black-letter IHL. This article argues that such approaches are doomed to fail, as procedural aspects of international obligations rarely, if ever, emerge through the evolution of an existing customary international obligation, let alone via the crystallization of a new customary international norm. They are usually triggered by a political shift that makes States adopt novel regulations setting forth the jurisdictional ramifications of enforcing a pre-existing right or obligation. This article thus advances a two-fold argument. First, it asserts that States’ increased compliance with the obligation to provide compensation for violations of IHL attributable to them would contribute to “the restoration and maintenance of peace” just as much as the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations thereof. Second, it argues that the individual right to claim reparations for IHL violations can only be established through a political decision of States, and that the establishment of an international mechanism for Ukraine might be an important precedent for the evolution of the current international system.

Corporate Social Responsibility in Conflict Zones: Navigating the Intersection with International Humanitarian Law

This paper examines the intersection of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and international humanitarian law (IHL), emphasizing the difficulties, responsibilities, and systems of accountability that businesses operating in conflict zones face. It gives a general review of IHL and CSR, emphasizing their applicability in regions impacted by war. This paper also examines the functions of corporate social responsibility in reducing the effects of armed conflicts on local communities using contemporary case studies from the Israel Palestine war and the Russian Ukraine war. This paper also delves into the protection and responsibility that international humanitarian law provides corporations along with the rules and regulations to hold corporations accountable in case they violate the law. It also stresses on the difficulties and gaps in accountability that are encountered by different other international law such as international criminal law, international human rights, law, and difference between other countries laws and legal system. Lastly, the paper discusses perspective suggestions and methods to incorporate IHL into various CSR activities which include partnership between businesses and humanitarian organizations, different NGOs, peace negotiations, mediations, economic recovery and socially responsible conduct and the most important adhering to human humanitarian laws, rules and guidelines.

Prohibition of Civilians Transfer Under International Humanitarian Law and Its Relation to Genocide

Forcible transfers or forced displacements due to an international or non-international war often happen and cause suffering to those who become displaced by loss of their homes and livelihoods and survival resources. As an example of the current situation, there are many civilians from Gaza, especially Palestinians, who have had to leave their homes and have to seek shelter. Alarmingly, some of them have fled to refugee camps that have been housing Palestinian refugees since the 1948 and 1967 conflicts with limited conditions. While, it is commonly known that evacuation should only be temporary. This fact invites us to discuss and answer the following questions: 1) How is the rule of international humanitarian law or the law of war regarding the transfer of population and civilians in time of war?; 2) How could the displacement of civil population and civilian in time of war amount to genocide or ethnic cleansing?; and 3) How is the law enforcement against the violations of international humanitarian law on the transfer of civilian population? It is expected that the answers of these questions could be a reference to comment any news of displacement due to armed conflict. To answer these questions, normative research is conducted by literature study for collecting secondary data from international treaties and other sources of international law such as customary international law, court rulings, expert opinions and information or news from the field, including the implementation of international law in Indonesian national legislation. Analysis of data for taking conclusion is carried out qualitatively, and the reporting is made in an explanatory descriptive manner. The results showed that the international humanitarian law system has contained sufficient rules containing certain prohibitions and obligations for parties to the conflict. There are several prohibitions against deportation and forcible transfer of population. There are several obligations to prevent the forcible transfer or forced displacement of population. There are several obligations to strive for the safety and fulfillment of basic needs of civilians in the event of evacuation and to ensure that the displaced civilians can immediately return to their places of origin. In circumstances, acts that cause forcible transfers or forced displaced civilians might be categorized as war crimes, crimes against humanity and/or genocide. Concerning the violations of the international humanitarian law relating the forcible transfer of civilian population due to war, the state is obliged to carry out the law enforcement against the persons involved who are under its jurisdiction. In addition, no State shall be allowed to absolve itself of any liability incurred by itself in respect of breaches referred to the rules discussed

Ethical Dilemmas Faced by Military Health Personnel During High-Intensity Conflict: The Crucial Issue of Triage.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has triggered the biggest conflict in Europe since the Second World War. It has forced countries to prepare for engagement on a massive scale, namely, a high-intensity war between nation states. A potential massive influx of wounded personnel risks saturating logistical supply chains and requires changes to not only medical care but also a paradigm shift. In this context, the principle of distributive justice is key. The aim is to save as many lives as possible through triage, which consists in "doing the greatest good for the greatest number." This idea is fundamental, as an emergency that has passed is no longer an emergency. However, international texts and treaties not only underline that the sole criterion for triage is clinical severity, but they also fail to take into account the patient's status (civilian, friend, and foe). In a high-intensity warfare situation, these texts, and the medical-surgical triage criteria they provide are insufficient, as caregivers may be required to make decisions based on the status of the patient. The need to make such choices could cause psychological suffering among military caregivers, as individuals are recurrently faced with difficult ethical dilemmas. One way to prevent this happening is to provide predeployment training in wartime medical ethics. The latter would include both instruction in international humanitarian law and practical simulations of clinical situations where the person is faced with an ethical dilemma.