Principles Of Humanitarian Law Research Articles

ROBOTIC REVOLUTION: DOES ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TRIGGER INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICT OR NON- INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICT

The introduction of new forms of artificial intelligence (AI) military weaponry specifically autonomous weapon systems (AWS) can select and engage targets without human intervention therefore the application of lethal AWS incorporation with AI has revolutionized armed conflicts.The main concern regarding the military application of AI is the use of force should be maintained by only human soldiers. There is an urgent need to reinterpret the threshold for triggering an international armed conflict because AI technology unintentionally causes war during border control or surveillance operation. This article predominantly focuses on fully autonomous weapon systems which refer to human agents being removed from certain force applications. The main research questions in this article are first, is it possible that an AWS might, alone, spark an international armed conflict, thus bringing international humanitarian law into force? Second, can the criteria of organisation and intensity that give rise to non-international armed conflicts be met when AWS are controlled by non-state armed actors? This study will examine the research questions by focusing on the main areas of debate in the field of international law on AWS, specifically the compatibility of AI with the principles of humanitarian law, the determination of international responsibility, and ethical problems.

VIOLATIONS OF HUMANITARIAN LAW: CONSISTENCE OF THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS IN THE PALESTINE – ISRAEL WAR

This paper discusses the Humanitarian Law Violations in the Palestine – Israel war which caused a humanitarian crisis due to the Israeli attack. Muslim countries that recognize the status of independent Palestine are furious to see the wars that never stop being prolonged. We need to know that violations of humanitarian law in the wars between Palestine and Israel were committed by these two countries. Implementation of the Geneva Conventions is a solution to strengthen the principles of humanitarian law from violations committed by the two disputing countries. This paper will define how to enforce humanitarian law violations that occurred in the Israeli and Palestinian wars and define humanitarian law violations in the Israeli and Palestinian wars. This paper uses a qualitative descriptive method using the concept of the principles of humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions.

The Right to Health And Barriers to Health Services for Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons: Review of Foreign Literature

All over the world, the number of people forced to flee their homes due to conflict, violence, and persecution is now higher than at any time in human history. Migrants, refugees, and other citizens belonging to the category of internally displaced persons have the right to health and medical care in the host country based upon the basic principles of humanitarian law and a number of international legal documents. However, the practice of providing medical care in the host country varies depending on the legislation and resources of the national healthcare system.
 The purpose of this study was to consider the barriers to the accessibility of medical care for migrants, refugees, and other internally displaced persons.

Security of Food, Civilians and Combatants Under Human Rights Laws in Times of War

Objective: The International humanitarian law addresses the tension between safeguarding people and preserving the rights of soldiers within the intricate context of armed conflicts. The proposal sets up an in-depth examination of the complex processes that support the public and armed forces within this crucial legal framework in times of conflict. The core proposal, traces the evolution of armed conflicts and international humanitarian law from their earliest days to their present-day manifestations. The Conventions of Geneva and their supplementary protocols form the basis that allows the safety of civilians and ensure the foods in war zones. The significance of differentiating between those fighting and those living in a war zone, a core premise of international humanitarian law, is clarified. The proposed concept of proportionality is investigated, bringing down the complex math that goes into balancing military requirements with the desire to prevent civilian injury. The theoretical framework offers instances taken from earlier times and current moments that illustrate the quiet interplay of these ideas. The implementation of international humanitarian law poses major challenges in an atmosphere marked by non-governmental organizations, unconventional strategies, and technological advances. The work analyzes these contemporary challenges and highlights the fuzzy boundary that divides combatants and people in this time of increased uncertainty. Migration, lack of food, mortality, and lifelong communal traumas often rush to the head when citizen safety is violated.
 
 Method: The security of Civilians based on Human Rights (SC-HR) of war emphasizes the core principles of humanitarian law even amid conflict, emphasizing the crucial function for international organizations and humanitarian actors in alleviating humanitarian pain.
 
 Result: The proposal provides an expression of the fundamental rights of combatants by explaining the safety measures and food provided to these individuals by international humanitarian law.
 
 Conclusion: This inquiry exposes the complex balancing act of contemporary combat as it tries to reconcile these liberties with the demands of the armed forces. The proposed method focuses on the processes employed for upholding international humanitarian law.

Malicious Motives or Innocent Intentions? How Moral Reactions to “Collateral Damage” Shape Perceptions of Intent in Wartime Conduct

Abstract The laws of war prohibit intentional attacks on civilians, a fact that reflects the widely held view that intentional killings are particularly egregious, far more so than incidental killings or pure accidents. Yet, recent scholarship in moral psychology shows that the relationship between intention-understanding and moral judgments can also go the other way, that is, that judgments about whether an action is right or wrong can influence the degree to which people regard the action as intentional or unintentional. Drawing on this line of research, in this article we examine how moral intuitions influence perceptions of the intent to harm civilians in war. Using vignette-based survey experiments, we look at whether complying with the international humanitarian law principles of proportionality and precaution in attacks affects intentionality attributions. Our results suggest that when soldiers are perceived as having broken these principles, people are more likely to conclude that they killed civilians intentionally.

Tinjauan Yuridis Pelanggaran Cyber Attack Dalam Perang Modern Berdasarkan Hukum Humaniter Internasional

Introduction: Violations in the form of cyber attacks are carried out by countries that have strong cyber space infrastructure against other countries that have weaknesses in their cyber defense systems.Purposes of the Research: The purpose of this paper is to find out and understand the position of cyber attacks in international humanitarian law and to know and understand the state's responsibility for the use of cyber attacks. Methods of the Research: This type of research is normative juridical where the research is carried out by collecting primary, secondary and tertiary data obtained using library research. The data that has been collected is analyzed qualitatively, the description of which is arranged systematically based on legal disciplines to achieve clarity on the issues to be discussed.Results of the Research: The results of this study indicate that the position of cyber attacks in international humanitarian law is the same as conventional wars based on a cyber attack approach as a war domain as well as attacks in cyber attacks. Cyber attacks also violate the principles of humanitarian law, namely the Principle of Discrimination, the Principle of Proportionality and Uncessary Suffering. Furthermore, with regard to the state having an obligation to be responsible for violations of the principles of International Humanitarian Law caused by cyber attacks carried out by a person or group, it is proven to have a close relationship with the state in accordance with international customs regarding state responsibilities and is also obliged in the responsibilities contained in the law. United Nations Charter. Forms of liability can be in the form of cessation of attacks and reparations. The reparations themselves can be carried out by means of restitution, compensation and giving satisfaction to the victim country.

Historical Complexities and Transformations of Refugee Policies in Kenya and Tanzania

This article discusses the history of hosting political refugees in Kenya and Tanzania. It argues that refugee hosting is not merely a humanitarian act, but a complex interplay of domestic interests, political ideologies, and foreign policies. The intertwinement of economic, social, and political factors creates situations in which refugee-related policies and their implementation are fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions that explain varied reactions to refugees from different politiconational backgrounds. Tanzania and Kenya, at various points in their history of hosting refugees as postindependence states, have alternately embraced and rejected specific refugee communities, showing how refugee hosting is not exclusively about the principles of humanitarian law. Reactions to political refugees in Kenya and Tanzania have crystalized in recent times into stringent regimes, as domestic and foreign-policy interests are increasingly formulated in ways that exclude refugees.

Russian military operation in Ukraine: analysis from the perspective of International Law

The Russian government emphatically stated that it started a full official attack on Ukrainian territory on February 24, 2022. While, the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, declared the imposition of martial law in all regions of his country after Russia carried out a full attack. In addition, several countries in the world responded through open statements of their respective heads of state, and some were accompanied by the imposition of sanctions. Regardless of the reasons and justifications for a decision, the community is the most affected party. This war situation, of course, needs to heed the principles of humanitarian law and humanitarian principles. This paper describes how the war between Russia and Ukraine is seen from the perspective of international law and obligations of the parties under international humanitarian law. This type of research is normative juridical research. The data collecting method used is literature study. The tools used in this research are secondary data in the form of documents consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and non-legal materials. These data were analyzed qualitatively and then presented descriptively. The results of this study found that the justifications used by the Russian government in carrying out military operations in Ukraine, namely self-defense, collective self-defense, and humanitarian intervention cannot be justified under international law. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine is included in an international armed conflict so that in order to protect civilians and certain subjects and objects, the parties to the conflict must comply with the provisions of international humanitarian law.

Responsibility of States to Protect Human Rights of Civilians in Internal War Situations: A Legal Analysis From a Human Security Perspective

Main objective of this research paper is to examine and evaluate the applicable legal standards governing the responsibility of states to protect their own people affected by the ravages of internal wars from a human security perspective. It will further discuss the responsibility of state to investigate the violations of human rights committed in such war situations and the need to prosecute the alleged offenders to provide redress to the victims of such violations. The violations of human rights will be broadly defined in this research to include both human rights and violations of humanitarian law in the context of non-international armed conflict situations. This paper will draw special attention to the international community’s queries pertains to the alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law principles against the protection of civilians during the civil war in Sri Lanka.

Principles of Humanitarian Law in the War Biography of Imam Ali (Peace be upon Him) the Equestrian Principle and Proportionality as a Model

The biography of Imam Ali included the most human principles and rules, and his war biography was amixture of justice, fairness and mercy. This brief study reached several results, which we summarize asfollows: The Imam hated war and pushed it as long as he found a way to do that. The basic principle forhim is the state of peace, and war is an exceptional and urgent case, and all his wars were self-defence, aresponse to aggression and the payment of sedition and corruption. The Imam prevailed in his battles againsthumanism over the necessities and requirements of war, so love, peace, compassion and mercy were thebasis of his personality, and his perseverance was forgiveness and tolerance, even if that led to the loss ofvictory, as happened in the incident of the law of water in the battle of ((Safin)). The principle of chivalrywas evident in its most beautiful form in the personality of the Imam, with the qualities of honesty, courageand arrogance he carried.

General Legal Limits of the Application of the Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems within the Purview of International Humanitarian Law

This article focuses on the problem of regulation of the application of the autonomous weapons systems from the perspective of the norms and principles of international humanitarian law. The article discusses the question of what restrictions are imposed on the application of such weapons in the international humanitarian law. The article presents a number of principles that must be met by both the weapons and their method of their application: distinction between civilians and combatants, military necessity, proportionality, prohibition on causing unnecessary suffering, and humanity.
 
 The author concludes that from the perspective of the principles of the international humanitarian law, it is doubtful if autonomous systems would be able to comply with these principles. Weapons that hit targets without human intervention have been applied for a long time, but they have never had the independence that they have now. The issue of compliance of autonomous weapons systems with the international humanitarian law can be considered if sufficient experience of application of such weapons in real conditions is accumulated. 
 
 This study demonstrates that it is impossible to say that autonomous weapons systems do not comply with the principles of humanitarian law in general. The paper provides policy recommendations and assessments for each of the principles under consideration. The author also concludes that it would be necessary not to prohibit autonomous weapons, because they do not comply with the principles of international humanitarian law, but to develop rules for their application and for human participation in their functioning. A significant challenge to the development of such rules is the opacity of these autonomous weapons systems, if we look at them as at the complex intelligent computer systems.

The changing role of multilateral forums in regulating armed conflict in the digital age

AbstractThis article examines a subset of multilateral forums dealing with security problems posed by digital technologies, such as cyber warfare, cyber crime and lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).1 It identifies structural issues that make it difficult for multilateral forums to discuss fast-moving digital issues and respond in time with the required norms and policy measures. Based on this problem analysis, and the recent experience of regulating cyber conflict and LAWS through Groups of Governmental Experts, the article proposes a schema for multilateral governance of digital technologies in armed conflict. The schema includes a heuristic for understanding human–machine interaction in order to operationalize accountability with international humanitarian law principles and international law applicable to armed conflict in the digital age. The article concludes with specific suggestions for advancing work in multilateral forums dealing with cyber weapons and lethal autonomy.

The Martens Clause, Global Pandemics, and the Law of Armed Conflict

In the aftermath of the UN Secretary General’s call for a global ceasefire following the outbreak of COVID-19, a discussion emerged regarding how International Humanitarian Law applies during a global pandemic. This Article contributes to that discussion through the lens of two distinct strands of thought on the Martens Clause. The first considers the Martens Clause as capable of affecting understandings of how the existing law of armed conflict applies to the conduct of hostilities during a global pandemic. Applying various scholarly and judicial interpretations of the Martens Clause’s contemporary legal import, the Article argues that the humanitarian law principles of proportionality, distinction, and military necessity have significant legal bearing on the conduct of hostilities concurrent to a global pandemic. During a global pandemic, the principle of proportionality ought to insist that military commanders include foreseeable incidental harm to civilians resulting from an attack’s expected impact on disease transmission in their incidental harm calculus. The principle of distinction should mandate that the effects of chosen means and methods of combat—including on disease transmission—be limited to military objectives. And the principle of military necessity obliges respect for its delicate balance with humanity, allowing only that which is necessary to achieve legitimate objectives—including taking seriously the duty to take tailored precautions before attacks amidst a global pandemic. These principles, particularly in light of the Martens Clause’s principles of humanity and the dictates of the public conscience, have important legal sway over the conduct of hostilities during pandemics.The second strand of thought on the Martens Clause relates to its ability in certain limited and defined situations to affect the formation process of new customary rules of humanitarian law. The Article argues that armed conflict during a global pandemic falls into this narrow category and that, as a result, the Martens Clause might influence the formation of an emerging custom regulating armed conflict during a global pandemic. In light of significant international support for the call for a global ceasefire in response to the outbreak of COVID-19, the Article assesses whether a new rule of humanitarian law mandating a ceasefire amidst the outbreak of future global pandemics is forming. Analyzing the current stage of this lex ferenda, the Article illustrates the elements lacking in the formation process. Nonetheless, such a rule solidifying into new customary law in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic would be a normatively positive evolution in light of the threat posed by future pandemics.

Study of Strategies to Limit of Cybercrime Attacks from the Perspective of International Humanitarian Law

Human progress in various political and social arenas creates new opportunities and challenges. This subject has led that international laws, including international humanitarian law, to seek for create appropriate laws for new developments. One of these new challenges is Cybercrime attacks, which is due to the increasing spread of technology and the development of cybercaps in various parts of the world, this Attacks are considered as a threat to human life. The main question of the current research is that what are the most important strategies for reducing cyberattacks from the perspective of international humanitarian law? The findings of this study are that Cybercrime attacks, Because of hurting to civilians, are considerable for international humanitarian law. In addition, Due to the increasing number of cybercrime attacks, need to apply the principles of international humanitarian law or to formulate new rules in the face of these attacks, is essential. Meanwhile, In the area of confronting with the effects and consequences of Anti-human rights Cybercrime attacks, Unilateral decisions are not very effective and in this regard, one of the main weaknesses have been the lack of collective agreement on how to manage cyber space. The present research approach is a descriptive-analytical approach which has taken a library Method to collecting information. Please cite this article as: Jafari A, Toutounchian M. Study of Strategies to Limit of Cybercrime Attacks from the Perspective of International Humanitarian Law. Bioethics Journal, Special Issue on Human Rights and Citizenship Rights 2019; 331-342.

Legality of Autonomous Weapons Systems and their Implications on Existing International Humanitarian Law Principles Approach: New Haven School of International Legal Theory

The objective of this paper is to legally analyze the issues surrounding the use and regulation of Autonomous Weapons Systems (AWS) and their implications on the existing principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). The research and mode of approach towards this issue will be directed in consonance with the New Haven School of International Legal Thought. The paper will begin by defining the terms ‘AWS’ and ‘New Haven school’ for the purpose of this study. Subsequently, it will highlight the various notable issues of contention with relation to existing principles of IHL. In doing so, the paper will earmark these issues under the scope of the New Haven method and conclude exclusively to that school of international thought. 
 In its conclusion, this paper will emphasize the need for AWS in today’s world, and how regulation, rather than prohibition, would be the ideal solution towards addressing the conundrum of their legality. It will also distinguish the key elements of the New Haven school and how these were directly incorporated into this paper so as to arrive at the predicated resolution, emphasizing the need for legality of AWS to attain world peace and order.

PREVENT ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE DURING ARMED CONFLICT

International humanitarian law consists of different rules that are used for protecting people and restricting the methods of warfare. The application of international humanitarian law is not only limited to the protection of victims related to armed conflicts during the outbreak of hostilities; however, it is also helpful for protecting the victims of these conflicts, including environment. The legal rules for the protection of environment in armed conflict also provide legal protection for the environment during the outbreak of hostilities. The study is divided into several sections, starting from environmental damage in the context of warfare. Afterward, the study discusses the importance of preventive measures in armed conflicts. Furthermore, the properties of prevention protection of environment are discussed including cultural property, engineering installations and protected areas near hospitals and safety zones. The study has shown positive consequences of preventive protection method in both the conduct and the outbreak of hostilities. A set of mechanisms or legal procedures is imposed under humanitarian conventions to provide preventive protection to the environment. The principles of humanitarian law have been developed and enforced through the actions of the Red Cross. However, proved nonetheless to be insufficient to prevent environmental destruction. Principally, the enforcement mechanisms hindered the effectiveness of the provisions. In contrast, several conditions for the possibility of registering cultural property in the international register of cultural should be encouraged based on special prevention mechanisms so that the humanitarian conventions can take serious considerations towards it.

No First Use: How to Overcome Japan’s Great Divide

ABSTRACTIn Japan, there is strong support for nuclear disarmament and a no nuclear first use policy. The benefits of a no first use policy in promoting nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation and in preventing the start of a nuclear war by accident or by miscalculations are clear. However, except for a brief period under the Democratic administration, the Japanese Government has insisted that the US reject the no first use policy. Even though practical US dependence on nuclear weapons has markedly declined, realists still cling to nuclear deterrence and the retention of the first use option. The strict application of international humanitarian law principles further limits cases where nuclear weapons can be used. The deep divide between the proponents and opponents of nuclear weapons has to be overcome for Japan to support the US no first use policy. There is, thus, a need to explore ways to bridge this divide. To this end, the divide between the proponents and opponents of no first use should be analyzed in detail based on the current military and security situation in the region.

The case for and against autonomous weapon systems.

The development of autonomous weapon systems, by removing the human element of warfare, could make war crimes and atrocities a thing of the past. But if these systems are unable to respect the principles of humanitarian law, we might create a super-intelligent predator that is beyond our control.

The Relationship of International Human Rights Law with International Humanitarian Law in Situations of International Armed Conflicts

The existence between International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law has a different feel from each other, though equally universal. As an example of mistreatment of prisoners of war committed by US Occupation Forces in Iraq, surely all countries say it is an international crimes (war crimes). This paper would discuss concerning how the relationship the International Human Rights with International Humanitarian Law in Situations of International Armed Conflicts. The paper argued that the relationship between human rights and humanitarian law can be distinguished but not separated. The principles of the UDHR can apply to the International Humanitarian Law, but some of the principles of the UDHR and limited humanitarian law apply in times of peace and times of armed conflict alone. Argued that the gap between International Humanitarian Law by the Human Rights bridged together through the enactment of the principles of human rights and humanitarian law principles that cannot be postponed.

Analyzing the Legal Dimensions of Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicle in the International Law

<p>The concept of manufacturing unmanned aircrafts developed before the Second World War. However after World War ΙΙ, the use of these aircrafts in aerial identification missions increased. In the recent decade, unmanned combat aerial vehicles used in order to identify and attack enemies in a direct manner. Unlike Classic wars, the future armed conflicts will focus on the use of military robots that have the ability to fight with robotic armaments which are 1000 kilometers distant from the battlefield and controlled by a person or function in an independent manner. According to the article 36 of the first protocol, each country should be informed about the legal principles of using different forms of robotic armaments such as unmanned combat aerial vehicles. In other words, no specific article or provision has been defined in the international law regarding the inhibition or restriction of manufacturing and developing these armaments. Although according to weapons law, these armaments don’t violate the principle of international law and they don’t threat human right. As a result any use of these unmanned combat aerial vehicles is not illegal. However, it is unlikely that using advanced remote/ robotic armaments be legal or don’t violate the principles of humanitarian law.</p>