nach oben

Erschienen in:

2021 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

5. A Bird’s-Eye View on Compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict 70 Years After the Adoption of the Geneva Conventions

verfasst von : Jann K. Kleffner

Erschienen in: Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Volume 22 (2019)

Verlag: T.M.C. Asser Press

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Against the background of a significant number of compliance mechanisms that the law of armed conflict (LoAC) provides for, on the one hand, and the fact that violations remain a pervasive feature of contemporary armed conflict, on the other, the present chapter examines five distinct compliance-related clusters. It begins by a reminder of the various existent compliance mechanisms and a plea for an honest, inter-disciplinary stocktaking of their efficacy. This is followed by another plea, namely for contextualizing compliance and compliance mechanisms and for moderating the expectations as to what they can achieve as counterweights to the myriad of factors that are prevalent in armed conflicts and that cause violations of the LoAC. The chapter then proceeds with addressing three particular trends that pose particular challenges in relation to compliance: the prevalence of non-international armed conflicts; that the current discourse about compliance is dominated by a culture of repression rather than prevention; and that compliance is increasingly individualized at the expense of addressing the collective nature of the violence inherent in armed conflict as the context in which violations occur.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel The Rebel with the Magnifying Glass: Armed Non-State Actors, the Right to Life and the Requirement to Investigate in Armed Conflict

Nächstes Kapitel Not the Usual Suspects: Religious Leaders as Influencers of International Humanitarian Law Compliance

See, e.g., International Committee of the Red Cross (2020) IHL in Action. https://ihl-in-action.icrc.org/. Accessed 5 May 2020; Ravel and Bernard 2017.

See, e.g., Kaldor 2013; Meron 2000; Bassiouni 2007; United Nations (2001) Report of the Secretary-General on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflicts, UN Doc. S/2001/331; Wood 2015.

See, e.g., Geneva Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 31 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC I), Article 48; Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), opened for signature 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 3 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (AP I), Article 84.

See, e.g., GC I, above n 3, Article 47; AP I, above n 3, Article 83.

GC I, above n 3, Article 47; Geneva Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 85 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC II), Article 48; Geneva Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 135 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC III), Article 127; Geneva Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC IV), Article 144; AP I, above n 3, Article 82.

AP I, above n 3, Article 82.

Ibid., Article 36.

See, e.g., GC I, above n 3, Chapter IX; GC II, above n 5, Chapter VIII; GC III, above n 5, Part VI, Section I; GC IV, above n 5, Articles 145–148; AP I, above n 3, Article 80.

GC I, above n 3, Article 8; GC II, above n 5, Article 8; GC III, above n 5, Article 8; GC IV, above n 5, Article 9; AP I, above n 3, Article 5.

See, e.g., GC I, above n 3, Article 10; AP I, above n 3, Article 5(4).

See, e.g., GC I, above n 3, Article 52.

AP I, above n 3, Article 90.

See, e.g., the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic and International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur.

On regional bodies, see, e.g., Viljoen 2014; Oellers-Frahm 2014; Shelton 2014. On the UN, see, e.g., Hampson 1992. More specifically on the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council, see Zhu 2014. See also for the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as an organ that applies human rights in armed conflict and its approach to the interplay with LoAC, e.g., Zyberi 2014.

International Law Commission 2001.

International Law Commission 2011.

Although not formalized. See Kleffner 2009.

AP I, above n 3, Article 85(5); Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, Rule 156. On the role of national courts, see, e.g., Weill 2014.

Romano et al. 2004.

These include the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and for Rwanda (ICTR) as well as the permanent International Criminal Court (ICC).

Geneva Convention I, above n 3, Article 49(3); Geneva Convention II, above n 5, Article 50(3); Geneva Convention III, above n 5, Article 129(3); Geneva Convention IV, above n 5, Article 146(3); Additional Protocol I, above n 3, Article 85(1).

District Court of Columbia (United States of America), Doe v Islamic Salvation Front, Memorandum Opinion, 3 February 1998, 993 F.Supp. 3 (D.D.C.1998). See, generally, international mass claims processes in Holtzmann and Kristjánsdóttir 2007.

As to the limitations, see GC I, above n 3, Article 46; GC II, above n 5, Article 47; GC IV, above n 5, Article 33; AP I, above n 3, Article 20. See also Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, Rule 145-148.

See, e.g., Nemitz 2001, p 95. See also, for instance, on prevention and other sentencing rationales ICTY case law including: retribution: ICTY, Prosecutor v Zlatko Aleksovski, Judgment, 24 March 2000, Case No. IT-95-14/1, para 185; deterrence: ICTY, Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Judgment, 26 January 2000, Case No. IT-94-1, para 48; rehabilitation: ICTY, Prosecutor v Dražen Erdemović, Judgment, 5 March 1998, Case No. IT-96-22, para 16; denunciation and adjuration: ICTY, Prosecutor v Dario Kordić and Mario Cerkez, Judgment, 17 December 2004, Case No. IT-95-14/2, paras 1080–1081; justice for victims: ICTY, Prosecutor v Momir Nikolic, Judgment, 2 December 2003, Case No. IT-02-60/1, para 86; post-conflict reconciliation: ICTY, Prosecutor v Momir Nikolic, Judgment, 2 December 2003, Case No. IT-02-60/1, para 60. See, generally for sentencing practice of the ICTY and ICTR, Hola 2014.

Azzarello and Niederhauser 2017.

See, e.g., the Ethiopia-Eritrea Claims Commission.

See, e.g., the monitoring and verification measures built into the Deeds of Commitment made by organized armed groups. See for this Geneva Call 2020.

McClelland 2011, p 403.

See, generally, Rogers and Stewart 2015.

See the summery accompanying Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, Rule 142 and the supporting practice referred to.

International Committee of the Red Cross 2004.

International Committee of the Red Cross 2018.

See, e.g., International Committee of the Red Cross 2004, p 11 in relation to spreading knowledge. See also International Committee of the Red Cross 2018 which extrapolate from the conducted research some implications for ICRC engagement with (different types of) organized armed groups. See, more broadly, the various contributions to issues 895/896 (2015) of the International Review of the Red Cross on ‘Generating Respect for the Law’.

International Committee of the Red Cross 2004, pp 5–10.

On the latter, see Sassòli 2019, pp 584–585. See also the debate between Sassòli and Shany in Sassòli and Shany 2011.

Stephens 2015.

Corn 2015.

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-international Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), opened for signature 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 609 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (AP II), Article 6(5).

GC III, above n 5, Article 126; GC IV, above n 5, Articles 76(6) and 143.

Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, Rule 124 B.

GC I, above n 3, Article 8; GC II, above n 5, Article 8; GC III, above n 5, Article 8; GC IV, above n 5, Article 9. Although these common provisions stipulate that “[t]he present Convention [i.e. the relevant Geneva Convention in its entirety, thus including Common Article 3] shall be applied with the cooperation and under the scrutiny of the Protecting Powers”, it is understood that the institute of Protecting Powers is only applicable in international armed conflicts. See Dörmann and Henckaerts 2016, p 372, para 1015. This is also confirmed by the relevant provision in AP I (Article 5) and the absence of the institute of Protecting Powers from AP II.

GC I, above n 3, Article 52; GC II, above n 5, Article 50; GC III, above n 5, Article 129; GC IV, above n 5, Article 146.

GC I, above n 3, Article 49; GC II, above n 5, Article 53; GC III, above n 5, Article 132; GC IV, above n 5, Article 149.

Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, Rule 141.

Ibid., Rule 143.

Ibid., Rule 150.

For this type of organized armed groups, see International Committee of the Red Cross 2018, Chapter 5.

On that point, see International Committee of the Red Cross 2004.

Ibid. and accompanying text.

See, e.g., the model Deed of Commitment under Geneva Call for the Prohibition of Sexual Violence in Situations of Armed Conflict and towards the Elimination of Gender Discrimination, available at https://www.genevacall.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/DoC-Prohibiting-sexual-violence-and-gender-discrimination.pdf.

In this sense, the view that “[c]rimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities, and only by punishing individuals who commit such crimes can the provisions of international law be enforced” (emphasis added), which the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg expressed in IMT (Nuremberg), France et al. v Hermann Wilhelm Göring et al., Trial Proceedings, 30 September 1946 and 1 October 1946, IMT Trial Proceedings Volume 22 only three years before the adoption of the GC’s, has not been confirmed by States.

See above n 3-22 and accompanying text for an overview.

On some of these questions, see Bernard 2015; Stubbins Bates 2015.

See above n 23.

See on this point in relation to deterrence, e.g., Jenks and Acquaviva 2015.

See, generally, Kelman 2009.

E.g., ICJ, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v United States of America), Judgment (Merits), 27 June 1986, [1986] ICJ Rep 14; ICJ, Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v Rwanda), Judgment (Jurisdiction of the Court and Admissibility of the Application), 3 February 2006, [2006] ICJ Rep 6.

See Kleffner 2009; Bellal 2015.

Examples include claims brought in accordance with the US Alien Tort Claims Act and Torture Victim Protection Act such as District Court of Columbia (United States of America), Doe v Islamic Salvation Front, Memorandum Opinion, 3 February 1998, 993 F.Supp. 3 (D.D.C.1998) and cases adjudicated in the Netherlands such as District Court The Hague (Netherlands), Prosecutor v Frans Cornelis Adrianus van Anraat, Sentencing, 24 April 2013, Case No. 09/751003-04. For a database of reparation cases in national courts, see http://www.nuhanovicfoundation.org/en/reparations-cases/.

See, e.g., the Collective Complaints Procedure introduced by the Additional Protocol providing for a system of collective complaints (1995) before the European Committee of Social Rights. See also American Convention on Human Rights, opened for signature 22 November 1969, 1144 UNTS 144 (entered into force 18 July 1978), Article 44 granting “[a]ny person or group of persons, or any nongovernmental entity legally recognized in one or more member states of the Organization” the right to lodge petitions with the Commission.

See, for instance, the collective reparation orders of the Trust Fund for Victims, summarized at https://www.trustfundforvictims.org/en/what-we-do/reparation-orders. See, generally, Rosenfeld 2010; Odier-Contreras Garduno 2018.

Azzarello C, Niederhauser M (2017) The Independent Humanitarian Fact-Finding Commission: Has the ‘Sleeping Beauty’ Awoken? ICRC. https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2018/01/09/the-independent-humanitarian-fact-finding-commission-has-the-sleeping-beauty-awoken/. Accessed 5 May 2020

Bassiouni C (2007) The New Wars and the Crisis of Compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict by Non-State Actors. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 98(3):711–810

Bellal A (2015) Establishing the Direct Responsibility of Non-State Armed Groups for Violations of International Humanitarian Law: Issues of Attribution. In: Gal-Or N, Ryngaert C, Noortman M (eds) Responsibilities of the Non-State Actor in Armed Conflict and the Market Place. Brill Publishers, Leiden, pp 304–322

Bernard V (2015) Time to take prevention seriously. International Review of the Red Cross 96(895/896):689–696

Corn G (2015) Contemplating the true nature of the notion of “responsibility” in responsible command. International Review of the Red Cross 96(895/896):901–917

Dörmann K, Henckaerts J-M (2016) Commentary on the First Geneva Convention: Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field. Cambridge University Press/ICRC, Geneva

Geneva Call (2020) Deeds. https://www.genevacall.org/?s=deed. Accessed 6 May 2020

Hampson F (1992) Using international human rights machinery to enforce the international law of armed conflicts. Military Law and the Law of War Review 31:117–147

Henckaerts J-M, Doswald-Beck L (2005) Customary International Humanitarian Law, Volume I: Rules. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Hola B (2014) Consistency and Pluralism of International Sentencing: An Empirical Assessment of the ICTY and ICTR Practice. In: Sliedregt E, Vasiliev S (eds) Pluralism in International Criminal Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 187–207

Holtzmann H, Kristjánsdóttir E (2007) International Mass Claims Processes: Legal and Practical Perspectives. Oxford University Press, Oxford

International Committee of the Red Cross (2004) The Roots of Behavior in War: Understanding and Preventing IHL Violations. ICRC, Geneva

International Committee of the Red Cross (2018) The Roots of Restraint in War. ICRC, Geneva

International Law Commission (2001) Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts. Yearbook of the International Law Commission 2001 2(2):31–143

International Law Commission (2011) Draft Articles on the Responsibility of International Organizations. Yearbook of the International Law Commission 2001 2(2):46–105

Jenks C, Acquaviva G (2015) Debate: The role of international criminal justice in fostering compliance with international humanitarian law. International Review of the Red Cross 96(895/896):775–794

Kaldor M (2013) New and Old Wars: Organised Violence in a Global Era, 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken

Kelman H (2009) The Policy Context of International Crimes. In: Nollkaemper A, van der Wilt H (eds) System Criminality in International Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 26–41

Kleffner J (2009) The Collective Accountability of Organised Armed Groups for System Crimes. In: Nollkaemper A, van der Wilt H (eds) System Criminality in International Law. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 238–269

McClelland (2011) The review of weapons in accordance with Article 36 of Additional Protocol I. International Review of the Red Cross 85(850):397–420

Meron T (2000) The Humanization of Humanitarian Law. American Journal of International Law 94(2):239–278

Nemitz J (2001) The Law of Sentencing in International Criminal Law: The Purposes of Sentencing and the Applicable Method for the Determination of the Sentence. Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 4:87–127

Odier-Contreras Garduno D (2018) Collective Reparations. Intersentia, Mortsel

Oellers-Frahm K (2014) A Regional Perspective on the Convergence and Conflicts of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in Military Operations: The European Court of Human Rights. In: de Wet E, Kleffner J (eds) Convergence and Conflicts of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in Military Operations. Pretoria University Law Press, Pretoria, pp 333–364

Ravel J, Bernard V (2017) Changing the narrative on international humanitarian law. ICRC. https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2017/11/24/changing-the-narrative-on-international-humanitarian-law/. Accessed 5 May 2020

Rogers A, Stewart D (2015) The Role of the Military Legal Advisor. In: Gill T, Fleck D (eds) The Handbook of the International Law of Military Operations, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 537–564

Romano C, Nollkaemper A, Kleffner J (2004) Internationalized Criminal Courts: Sierra Leone, East Timor, Kosovo, and Cambodia. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Rosenfeld F (2010) Collective reparation for victims of armed conflict. International Review of the Red Cross 92(879):731–746

Sassòli M (2019) International Humanitarian Law: Rules, Controversies, and Solutions to Problems Arising in Warfare. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham

Sassòli M, Shany Y (2011) Debate: Should the obligations of states and armed groups under international humanitarian law really be equal? International Review of the Red Cross 93(882):425–442

Shelton D (2014) Humanitarian law in the Inter-American human rights system. In: de Wet E, Kleffner J (eds) Convergence and Conflicts of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in Military Operations. Pretoria University Law Press, Pretoria, pp 365–394

Stephens D (2015) Behaviour in war: The place of law, moral inquiry and self-identity. International Review of the Red Cross 96(895/896):751–773

Stubbins Bates E (2015) Towards effective military training in international humanitarian law. International Review of the Red Cross 96(895/896):795–816

United Nations (2001) Report of the Secretary-General on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflicts, UN Doc. S/2001/331

Viljoen F (2014) The Relationship between International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the African Human Rights System: An Institutional Approach. In: de Wet E, Kleffner J (eds) Convergence and Conflicts of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in Military Operations. Pretoria University Law Press, Pretoria, pp 303–332

Weill S (2014) The Role of National Courts in Applying International Humanitarian Law. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Wood R (2015) Understanding Strategic Motives for Violence against Civilians during Civil Conflict. In: Krieger H (ed) Inducing Compliance with International Humanitarian Law: Lessons from the African Great Lakes Region. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 13–43

Zhu L (2014) International Humanitarian Law in the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council: An Empirical Survey. Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies 5(1–2):186–212

Zyberi G (2014) The Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice and International Criminal Courts and Tribunals. In: de Wet E, Kleffner J (eds) Convergence and Conflicts of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law in Military Operations. Pretoria University Law Press, Pretoria, pp 395–416

District Court of Columbia (United States of America), Doe v Islamic Salvation Front, Memorandum Opinion, 3 February 1998, 993 F.Supp. 3 (D.D.C.1998)

District Court The Hague (Netherlands), Prosecutor v Frans Cornelis Adrianus van Anraat, Sentencing, 24 April 2013, Case No. 09/751003-04

ICJ, Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v United States of America), Judgment (Merits), 27 June 1986, [1986] ICJ Rep 14

ICJ, Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application: 2002) (Democratic Republic of the Congo v Rwanda), Judgment (Jurisdiction of the Court and Admissibility of the Application), 3 February 2006, [2006] ICJ Rep 6

ICTY, Prosecutor v Dražen Erdemović, Judgment, 5 March 1998, Case No. IT-96-22

ICTY, Prosecutor v Duško Tadić, Judgment, 26 January 2000, Case No. IT-94-1

ICTY, Prosecutor v Zlatko Aleksovski, Judgment, 24 March 2000, Case No. IT-95-14/1

ICTY, Prosecutor v Momir Nikolic, Judgment, 2 December 2003, Case No. IT-02-60/1

ICTY, Prosecutor v Dario Kordić and Mario Cerkez, Judgment, 17 December 2004, Case No. IT-95-14/2

IMT (Nuremberg), France et al. v Hermann Wilhelm Göring et al., Trial Proceedings, 30 September 1946 and 1 October 1946, IMT Trial Proceedings Volume 22

American Convention on Human Rights, opened for signature 22 November 1969, 1144 UNTS 144 (entered into force 18 July 1978)

Geneva Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 31 (entered into force 21 October 1950)

Geneva Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 85 (entered into force 21 October 1950)

Geneva Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 135 (entered into force 21 October 1950)

Geneva Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287 (entered into force 21 October 1950)

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), opened for signature 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 3 (entered into force 7 December 1978)

Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), opened for signature 8 June 1977, 1125 UNTS 609 (entered into force 7 December 1978)

Titel: A Bird’s-Eye View on Compliance with the Law of Armed Conflict 70 Years After the Adoption of the Geneva Conventions
verfasst von: Jann K. Kleffner
Verlag: T.M.C. Asser Press
Buch: Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Volume 22 (2019)
Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-398-6

Electronic ISBN: 978-94-6265-399-3

Copyright-Jahr: 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-399-3_5

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Premium Partner