Suchergebnisse

States party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I of 1977 have an obligation to take measures necessary to suppress all acts contrary to their provisions. Moreover, States must investigate war crimes allegedly committed by their nationals or on their territory, and other war crimes over which they have jurisdiction, such as on the basis of universal jurisdiction, and, if appropriate, prosecute the suspects. In accordance with these obligations and the limits they impose, States may adopt certain measures during and in the aftermath of armed conflicts to promote reconciliation and peace, one of which is amnesties. International humanitarian law (IHL) contains rules pertaining to the granting and scope of amnesties. Specifically, Article 6(5) of Protocol II additional to the Geneva Conventions relating to non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) provides that, at the end of hostilities, the authorities in power shall endeavour to grant the broadest possible amnesty to persons who have participated in the armed conflict, or those deprived of their liberty for reasons related to the armed conflict. Importantly, under customary IHL (as identified in Rule 159 of the ICRC customary IHL study), this excludes persons suspected of, accused of, or sentenced for war crimes in NIACs.

AbstractConflict in cyberspace refers to actions taken by parties to a conflict to gain advantage over their adversaries in cyberspace by using various technological tools and people-based techniques. In principle, advantages can be obtained by damaging, destroying, disabling, or usurping an adversary's computer systems ('cyber attack') or by obtaining information that the adversary would prefer to keep secret ('cyber espionage' or 'cyber exploitation'). A variety of actors have access to these tools and techniques, including nation-states, individuals, organized crime groups, and terrorist groups, and there is a wide variety of motivations for conducting cyber attacks and/or cyber espionage, including financial, military, political, and personal. Conflict in cyberspace is different from conflict in physical space in many dimensions, and attributing hostile cyber operations to a responsible party can be difficult. The problems of defending against and deterring hostile cyber operations remain intellectually unresolved. The UN Charter and the Geneva Conventions are relevant to cyber operations, but the specifics of such relevance are today unclear because cyberspace is new compared to these instruments.

International humanitarian law is the body of rules (the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and their two Additional Protocols of 1977) governing the rights and obligations of the belligerents in war.In signing and later ratifying the Conventions and their Protocols, the States party thereto undertake not only to respect and ensure respect for humanitarian law in all circumstances, but also to disseminate the relevant texts as widely as possible in time of peace as in time of war, among both the armed forces and police and the civilian population. This is stipulated in Articles 47, 48, 127 and 144 of the four Geneva Conventions respectively, which also require States to include the study of humanitarian law in programmes of military instruction. Moreover, States are duty-bound to incorporate the provisions of humanitarian law in their internal legislation.

AbstractThis article explores the relationship between precision attack and international humanitarian law. It begins by addressing the nature of precision attack, including precision technologies, the combat environment in which it occurs, attacker tactics, and the targeting process. Modern precision attack's greatest impact on international humanitarian law lies in four areas: indiscriminate attack; proportionality; precautions in attack; perfidy and protected status. The author concludes that precision warfare has both positive and negative implications for the interpretation and application of international humanitarian law on the twenty-first-century battlefield.

On the eve of the Diplomatic Conference, which is to hold its second session in Geneva at the beginning of February, we think it worth while to recall the titles of some books and documents published by the ICRC about the Geneva Conventions, their dissemination and the development of international humanitarian law.

To mark his seventieth birthday, Jean Pictet, Honorary Vice-President of the ICRC, gave a lecture at the University of Geneva on 16 November 1984 entitled "The formation of international humanitarian law".A remarkable summary of the development of humanitarian law in the twentieth century, it concludes with remarks which go well beyond the original subject. They express his thoughts about the difficult relationships between humanitarian imperatives and military and political necessities and between idealism and pragmatism; reference is also made to everyone's responsibility to disseminate and apply a law which stems not only from humanity but also from common sense.

The International Institute of Humanitarian Law in San Remo held its fourth Round Table on Present Problems of International Humanitarian Law from 30 August to 4 September 1977. The meeting was opened by Mr. Jean Pictet, Vice-President of the International Committee of the Red Cross; some extracts from his address are given below.

The legal protection of children was introduced into international humanitarian law after the Second World War. Experience during that conflict had, in fact, pointed to the urgent need to draw up an instrument of public international law for protecting civilian population in wartime. The results of the ICRC's efforts in this field led to the adoption of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war. From that time on, children, as members of the civilian population, were entitled to benefit from the application of that Convention. Moreover, the first international humanitarian law regulations concerning armed conflicts not of an international character, contained in article 3, common to the four 1949 Geneva Conventions, were drawn up at the 1949 Diplomatic Conference. Here again, children were protected, in the same way as all "persons taking no active part in the hostilities".

The title of my talk may appear more than a little ambitious or the subject too extensive. What I intend to do, in fact, is to give here, in no particular order, some of the thoughts and experiences of one engaged in humanitarian law who had the great good fortune to be associated with this fascinating work from the beginning of his career.