Humane international law

The humane international law (DIH) is a whole of rule S which, for reasons Humanitaire S, seeks to limit the effects of the armed conflicts. It protects the people who do not take part or more in the Combat S and restricts the means and methods of war. The DIH is also called “Droit of the war” or “Droit of the armed conflicts”.

The DIH belongs to the international law which governs the relations between States. This last is made of agreements concluded between States, called treated or conventions, of the international habit, consisted the practice of the States recognized by them as being obligatory, as well as general principles of the right.

The DIH applies in the conflict situations armed. It does not determine if a State has or not the right to resort to the force. This question is governed by an important part but distinct from the international law, contained in the Charter of the United Nations.

Definition of the " Right of the guerre"

The war is a duel in front of thirds. It is an implementation of the hostility, by employs armed force, resulting in combat durable, more or less destroying.

Two branches of the Right of the war (International law Humane

the Juice in bello (right in the war): Governs the use of the armed force.

- Which (the right has)? and How to make the war? - Which are the actors, as well as the methods, the instruments, which govern the war?

the Juice AD bellum (right to make the war): governs the recourse to the armed force.

- Which has the right to order the war and for what - Which are the licit causes?

The the United Nations and qualified Regional organizations

For these types of organization, the recourse to the armed force, is done according to their charter, and indirectly because 3 reasons remain: - The international organizations depend on the Member States to provide the army - No armed force is placed directly at their disposal - Those are made up of Sovereign states

Sources of the humane international law

There exist two major sources of the humane international law: treated and conventions and the usual International law

Why is there the right to resort to the armed force?

One can regard the war as being legitimate, according to two essential criteria:

- The decision of last recourse

- An attempt post-bellum of resolution of the litigation

the principle of interetatic prohibition of the recourse to the armed force and its exceptions

The the United Nations, regulate in theory peacefully and consensuellement the different ones. The prohibition of the recourse to the armed force against the territorial integrity, independence and policy and any other manner incompatible with the goals of the United Nations.

the principle of the collective security:

Vis-a-vis a State " Peace-breaker ", the Member States of the United Nations, must react economically, diplomatically and militarily, because they have legal principles and interests to act against the aforementioned " peace-breaker". This principle depends, of the political solidarity of the States and the decision of the Safety advice . But this prohibition of the recourse to the force knows an exception, that of the self-defense.

Texts

They are the Geneva Conventions 1949 and their Additional protocols (I, 1977 - II, 1977 - III, 2005), like:

the Convention of $the Hague of 1954 for the protection of the cultural goods in the event of armed conflict and its two Protocols

the Convention of 1972 on the biological weapons

the Convention of 1980 on some traditional weapons and its five Protocols

the Convention of 1993 on the chemical weapons

the Convention of Ottawa of 1997 on the anti-personnel mines

the Treaty of Rome of 1998 on the International penal court

optional Protocol of 2000 referring to Relative convention with the rights of the child, relating to the implication of children in the armed conflicts.

Usual international law

Fields of application of the humane international law

the DIH covers two fields of application precise:

the protection of the people who do not take part, or more, with the engagements.

restrictions of the means of war, mainly weapons, and with the methods of war, like certain military tactics.

Protection of the civilians

The DIH protects the civilians particularly not taking part in the hostilities. Convention IV of Geneva of 1949 is entirely devoted to them.

A civilian does not have the right to take part in the conflict. A civilian having taken part in the conflict without having the right can of it be legally judged for that and will not see itself not granted the statute of combatant.

The DIH distinguishes also the civilians not taking part in the conflict from the civilians taking an active share there. Protocol I of 1977 on the International Armed conflicts in its articles 43 and 44 defines the criteria making it possible to distinguish Civils and militiamans/in favor/guerillas. Thus, the civilians organized in group organized and answering the criteria of article 44 can in certain cases see themselves recognizing the statute of prisoner of war.

Restrictions of the means of war

to make

Implementation of the humane international law

On the level of the Juice AD bellum, the authors of the armed conflicts, those which have the right to resort to the armed force, are:

States:

- soldiers, since the government orders it - The civilians, who defend their State. Distinction between the franc-tireurs, who push back the invasion and the resistant ones which resists the occupation.

the liberation movements main road:

Movements of anti and post-colonial fight, and anti Apartheid - Guerillas

See the Database of implementation nationaledu ICRC. (This database contains texts and comments relating to implementation the national of the humane international law).

Many violations of the DIH

to make

The respect of the DIH: possible sanctions

The right of the war, was transgressed, but it was especially observed. In the event of transgressions, the DIH envisages a whole battery of sanctions. First type of sanction: retortions : I.e., reaction of a belligerent to the illicit acts of the unfavourable belligerent. Second type of sanction: the setting of international responsibility for the State : I.e., compensation for the illicit damages caused by a State. Third type of sanction: Penal sanctions : I.e. obligation to repress the instigators of international crimes. Fourth type of sanction: Mobilization of the opinion : I.e., the duty to inform the population thanks to the information flow.

However, these sanctions present defects. The sanctions of the second and third type, are sanctions ex-post facto (after the facts), and are only against an overcome part. The fourth type, depends on the access to the information of a population, of its diffusion as well as its impact. In connection with the sanctions two and four, after a conflict, the States prefer to restore normal diplomatic relations, rather than of long procedures, in order to work with the reconciliation. As for the the United Nations, they privilege the re-establishment of peace.

In conclusion, even if the sanctions are more theoretical than practical, the war is not apart from the Right, because dialectical, allowed the/prohibited one is found. If the juice in bello appears primarily violable, that is explained by nature even this right. It is about a right between enemies. Just as one does not confuse trade and swindle, one will not confuse act of war and War crime.

Random links: