The Role of the International Criminal Court | International Humanitarian Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

The Role of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in International Humanitarian Law

1. Introduction to the International Criminal Court (ICC)

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a permanent international tribunal established to prosecute individuals for serious crimes of international concern. It was created under the Rome Statute, which was adopted on July 17, 1998, and entered into force on July 1, 2002. The ICC’s primary mandate is to investigate, prosecute, and adjudicate cases involving genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and, more recently, the crime of aggression. The ICC operates independently of the United Nations, though it has a cooperative relationship with it.

2. Jurisdiction of the ICC

The ICC has jurisdiction over four primary types of international crimes:

• Genocide: Acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.
• Crimes against humanity: Widespread or systematic attacks directed against civilians, including acts such as murder, enslavement, torture, rape, and persecution.
• War crimes: Violations of the laws and customs of war, including serious breaches of the Geneva Conventions, such as targeting civilians, using child soldiers, or committing torture.
• Crime of aggression: The use of armed force by a state against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, or political independence of another state in violation of the UN Charter.

The ICC’s jurisdiction is triggered in three ways:

1. Referral by a State Party: A State Party to the Rome Statute may refer a situation in its territory or involving its nationals to the ICC.
2. Referral by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC): The UNSC can refer situations to the ICC, even for non-state parties.
3. Proprio motu investigations: The ICC Prosecutor may initiate investigations on their own accord with the approval of the Pre-Trial Chamber, provided the crimes occurred in the territory of a State Party or the accused is a national of a State Party.

3. Complementarity Principle

A key principle underlying the ICC's jurisdiction is complementarity. The ICC is a court of last resort, meaning it will only exercise jurisdiction if national courts are unwilling or unable to genuinely prosecute the accused. The Rome Statute enshrines the preference for national jurisdictions to prosecute crimes, and the ICC steps in only when domestic systems fail to act appropriately.

• Unwillingness is assessed when national proceedings are conducted in bad faith, for example, to shield individuals from criminal responsibility.
• Inability occurs when national courts are unable to prosecute due to a lack of functioning judicial systems or other structural impediments.

4. The Role of the ICC in International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), or the laws of war, governs the conduct of parties during armed conflicts, protecting individuals who are not or no longer participating in hostilities and regulating the means and methods of warfare. The ICC plays a critical role in enforcing IHL by ensuring accountability for violations of these laws.

The ICC prosecutes serious breaches of IHL, classified as war crimes, which include:

• Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions (e.g., willful killing, torture, inhumane treatment).
• Other serious violations such as intentionally directing attacks against civilians, schools, and hospitals, or using weapons that cause unnecessary suffering (e.g., chemical or biological weapons).

The Rome Statute incorporates key IHL principles, ensuring that the ICC can prosecute violations that occur in both international and non-international armed conflicts.

5. The Role of the ICC Prosecutor

The Prosecutor of the ICC is responsible for investigating and prosecuting individuals for the aforementioned crimes. The Prosecutor has wide discretion in deciding which cases to pursue, based on the principle of prosecutorial independence. The Prosecutor’s office can:

• Conduct preliminary examinations: Before launching a full investigation, the office of the Prosecutor conducts preliminary examinations to determine if the legal criteria for opening an investigation are met.
• Seek arrest warrants: If there is sufficient evidence, the Prosecutor can request the Pre-Trial Chamber to issue arrest warrants for individuals responsible for international crimes.

The ICC Prosecutor’s decisions are based on the gravity of the crime, the interests of justice, and the interests of victims. The Prosecutor’s office must ensure that its investigations and prosecutions meet the highest standards of fairness and impartiality, in accordance with the Rome Statute.

6. Cooperation with the ICC

The ICC relies heavily on the cooperation of states and international organizations for the execution of its mandate. This cooperation includes:

• Arrest and surrender of accused persons: States Parties are obligated to arrest and surrender individuals wanted by the ICC.
• Providing evidence and information: States must assist the ICC in gathering evidence and sharing information relevant to cases.
• Victim and witness protection: States must take measures to protect victims and witnesses who cooperate with the ICC.

The ICC has no enforcement arm, so its effectiveness hinges on the willingness of States Parties and the international community to cooperate. The UN Security Council can refer situations to the ICC and support its enforcement through sanctions or other measures.

7. Limitations of the ICC

Despite its significant role in promoting accountability and justice for international crimes, the ICC faces several limitations:

• Non-universal membership: Not all states are parties to the Rome Statute. Major powers like the United States, Russia, China, and India are not parties, which limits the ICC’s jurisdiction over individuals from these countries.
• Political considerations: The ICC has faced criticism that its actions are influenced by political agendas. For example, most of the ICC’s cases have come from Africa, leading to accusations of bias.
• Challenges in enforcement: The ICC depends on states to enforce its orders, such as arrest warrants. In some instances, states have refused to cooperate, hampering the Court’s ability to bring accused persons to trial.

8. The Role of the ICC in Protecting Victims

The ICC has developed a system for the participation and protection of victims in its proceedings, which is a significant development in international criminal justice. Victims can:

• Participate in proceedings: Victims have the right to participate in ICC proceedings, allowing their voices to be heard in matters related to the charges, the trial, and reparations.
• Receive reparations: The ICC has a Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) that assists with reparations for victims of crimes under its jurisdiction. This includes both monetary compensation and other forms of assistance, such as psychological support and physical rehabilitation.
• Protection of witnesses and victims: The ICC has measures in place to ensure the protection and safety of victims and witnesses who cooperate with the Court.

9. Conclusion

The International Criminal Court plays a crucial role in enforcing International Humanitarian Law by holding individuals accountable for serious crimes that affect the international community. Its jurisdiction over genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression serves to complement national judicial systems. While the ICC faces challenges, such as political criticism and enforcement limitations, its role in prosecuting violators of international law and providing justice to victims remains vital in the global effort to prevent impunity and promote peace and security. The effectiveness of the ICC, however, will continue to depend on the cooperation of the international community, the support of States Parties, and its capacity to address global concerns with fairness and impartiality.

International Armed Conflicts | Categories of Armed Conflicts | International Humanitarian Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) – Categories of Armed Conflicts

1. Categories of Armed Conflicts

In International Humanitarian Law (IHL), armed conflicts are generally categorized into International Armed Conflicts (IACs) and Non-International Armed Conflicts (NIACs). This distinction is crucial because the applicable legal regime depends on the type of conflict, with certain rules being stricter or more detailed in international armed conflicts.

a. International Armed Conflicts (IACs)

Definition: An International Armed Conflict is an armed conflict that occurs between two or more states. It is the classical form of armed conflict and is governed by a comprehensive body of rules, including the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocol I of 1977.

The scope of IAC is broad and includes both declared wars and any armed clash between states, regardless of whether the parties acknowledge a state of war. A single incident involving the use of force between two states, such as a border skirmish or a naval engagement, can trigger the application of IHL.

Sources of Law Governing IACs: The legal framework governing international armed conflicts is primarily found in the following sources:

1. Geneva Conventions of 1949:

   • Geneva Convention I: For the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field.
   • Geneva Convention II: For the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick, and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea.
   • Geneva Convention III: Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.
   • Geneva Convention IV: Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.

2. Additional Protocol I (1977):

   • Supplementary to the Geneva Conventions, this protocol expands protections, particularly for civilians and combatants in international armed conflicts.

3. Customary International Law:

   • Customary IHL, as compiled by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), provides additional binding norms for states, even those not party to specific treaties.

4. Hague Regulations (1907):

   • The Hague Conventions of 1907 lay down rules concerning the conduct of hostilities, particularly regarding the means and methods of warfare.

Applicability: An international armed conflict exists whenever there is a resort to armed force between two or more states. There is no requirement that the conflict is declared or that the belligerents recognize the state of war. Even minor clashes can trigger the application of IHL rules.

Core Principles of IHL in IACs: The following are key principles of IHL applicable in international armed conflicts:

1. Distinction:

   • Parties must always distinguish between combatants and civilians. Only combatants and military objectives may be directly targeted; civilians and civilian objects are protected from attack unless they take a direct part in hostilities.

2. Proportionality:

   • Even if a legitimate military target is being attacked, the incidental loss of civilian life or damage to civilian property must not be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage gained.

3. Necessity:

   • The use of force must be limited to what is necessary to achieve a legitimate military objective. Superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering must be avoided.

4. Humanity:

   • Inhumane treatment, such as torture, inhumane acts, and degrading treatment of individuals, is strictly prohibited.

Who is Protected: In IACs, the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I protect a wide range of individuals:

1. Combatants:

   • Lawful combatants have the right to participate in hostilities and, if captured, are entitled to prisoner-of-war status under the Third Geneva Convention.

2. Civilians:

   • Civilians are protected from the effects of hostilities unless they take a direct part in the conflict. Civilians who are not taking part in hostilities are granted specific protections under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

3. Wounded and Sick:

   • The wounded and sick, whether military or civilian, are to be cared for without adverse distinction.

4. Prisoners of War (POWs):

   • Captured members of the armed forces must be treated humanely and are protected from violence, intimidation, insults, and public curiosity. They are also entitled to fair trials for any crimes they may be accused of.

5. Detainees:

   • Civilians in the hands of the enemy are also protected against arbitrary detention and must be treated humanely.

Means and Methods of Warfare: In international armed conflicts, the use of certain means and methods of warfare is restricted:

1. Weapons Prohibited under IHL:

   • Certain weapons that cause unnecessary suffering or that have indiscriminate effects are prohibited. These include biological weapons, chemical weapons, anti-personnel mines (under the Ottawa Treaty), and certain types of explosive remnants of war.

2. Targeting Rules:

   • The parties to the conflict must ensure that their military operations are directed only at lawful military objectives. Civilian objects such as homes, schools, and hospitals are protected unless they are being used for military purposes.

3. Sieges and Blockades:

   • While these are permitted, the methods used in sieges and blockades must not cause undue suffering to civilians. Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is explicitly prohibited under Protocol I.

End of Hostilities: The cessation of hostilities in an international armed conflict does not necessarily terminate the application of IHL. The obligations under IHL, particularly regarding the treatment of prisoners of war and the protection of civilians, may continue until all detainees are released and all combatants have been repatriated.

War Crimes: Violations of IHL during international armed conflicts constitute war crimes. These include but are not limited to:

1. Willful killing of civilians.
2. Torture or inhumane treatment, including biological experiments.
3. Willfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.
4. Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly.

These crimes are subject to universal jurisdiction, meaning that any state can prosecute individuals accused of war crimes, regardless of where the crimes occurred or the nationality of the perpetrator.

Recent Developments in International Armed Conflicts:

• The scope of IHL governing IACs has also expanded to include wars of national liberation. Under Additional Protocol I, conflicts where peoples are fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation, or racist regimes in the exercise of their right to self-determination are considered international armed conflicts.

• Moreover, there has been increasing recognition of the role of non-state actors in international conflicts, particularly in cases where these actors operate with state sponsorship or control. However, non-international armed conflict law often applies to such actors unless they can be classified under the rules of IAC.

In sum, the legal regime governing international armed conflicts is well-established and rooted in both treaty law and customary international law. It is designed to regulate the conduct of hostilities, protect non-combatants, and ensure humane treatment of all those affected by conflict. The Geneva Conventions, along with their Additional Protocols, remain the bedrock of the legal framework, ensuring a comprehensive approach to safeguarding human dignity even in times of war.

Internal or Non-international Armed Conflict | Categories of Armed Conflicts | International Humanitarian Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Internal or Non-international Armed Conflict (NIAC) under International Humanitarian Law

1. Definition and Legal Framework An internal or non-international armed conflict (NIAC) refers to armed hostilities that take place within the borders of a single state, involving the government and organized armed groups, or between such groups themselves, without the direct involvement of other states. It is distinct from international armed conflicts (IACs) which involve multiple states.

The legal framework for NIACs is primarily derived from two key sources under International Humanitarian Law (IHL):

• Common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions: Common Article 3 sets out minimum standards of humane treatment for persons not taking an active part in hostilities, including civilians and combatants who are hors de combat (wounded, captured, or otherwise incapacitated). It applies in all NIACs and is often referred to as a "mini-convention" within the broader Geneva Conventions.
• Additional Protocol II (AP II) to the Geneva Conventions of 1977: AP II supplements Common Article 3 and provides more detailed rules for the protection of civilians and combatants. It only applies in situations where the armed groups are organized and control a significant portion of territory, enabling them to carry out sustained military operations.

2. Threshold for a Non-international Armed Conflict A crucial distinction between a mere internal disturbance (e.g., riots, isolated violence) and a NIAC under IHL is the level of intensity and organization of the parties involved. For an internal conflict to rise to the level of a NIAC, two main criteria must be satisfied:

• Intensity of the Conflict: The hostilities must surpass mere internal disturbances or tensions, reaching a threshold of sustained armed violence.
• Organization of the Parties: The non-state armed groups must have a level of organization that allows them to engage in coordinated military operations. This includes having a command structure, capacity for planning operations, and ability to implement IHL.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has provided a working definition of NIAC in its Tadić case, specifying these criteria for recognizing the existence of a NIAC.

3. Legal Protections in NIACs Both Common Article 3 and AP II emphasize the humane treatment of individuals during NIACs. These protections include:

• Protection of Non-Combatants: Civilians and those not directly participating in hostilities must be treated humanely. Acts such as murder, torture, mutilation, cruel treatment, and taking hostages are prohibited.
• Protection of the Wounded, Sick, and Shipwrecked: Parties to the conflict are obligated to collect and care for the wounded and sick without adverse distinction. Medical personnel and facilities must also be respected.
• Humane Treatment of Detainees: Detainees, whether combatants or civilians, are entitled to humane treatment. Executions without a proper trial and degrading treatment are prohibited.
• Prohibition of Indiscriminate Attacks: Attacks against civilian populations or civilian objects are strictly forbidden. AP II also prohibits acts of terror against civilians and prohibits starvation as a method of warfare.

4. Key Principles Governing NIACs The following core principles of IHL govern NIACs, similar to their application in international armed conflicts:

• Principle of Distinction: Parties must always distinguish between civilians and combatants. Only combatants may be targeted.
• Principle of Proportionality: Even if an attack is directed against a legitimate military target, the attack must not cause excessive civilian harm relative to the anticipated military advantage.
• Principle of Military Necessity: Military operations must serve a legitimate military purpose, and the harm caused must be proportional to the objective.
• Principle of Humanity: Parties to the conflict must ensure that suffering is minimized, especially for those who are no longer participating in hostilities, such as the wounded, detainees, and civilians.

5. International Criminal Responsibility Individuals, including military commanders and political leaders, can be held criminally responsible for war crimes committed during a NIAC. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) recognizes the commission of war crimes in NIACs, including:

• Murder, torture, and inhuman treatment.
• Attacks against civilians.
• Pillage and destruction of civilian property.
• Sexual violence, including rape.
• Forced displacement of civilian populations.

The ICC’s jurisdiction over NIACs is significant as it broadens accountability for violations of IHL, particularly in conflicts involving non-state actors.

6. Domestic Application of NIAC Rules in the Philippines In the Philippines, non-international armed conflicts have historically involved the state and non-state armed groups such as the New People’s Army (NPA), the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), and the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG). These conflicts have triggered the application of NIAC norms under both Common Article 3 and AP II, to which the Philippines is a party.

• Republic Act No. 9851 (Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity) incorporates IHL provisions into domestic law. It defines and penalizes war crimes committed during non-international armed conflicts, such as attacks on civilians, torture, and inhuman treatment.
• The 2009 Internal Peace and Security Plan (IPSP): The Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) acknowledges the applicability of IHL, particularly Common Article 3 and AP II, in its counter-insurgency operations. The plan also emphasizes adherence to human rights laws alongside IHL norms.

7. Challenges and Evolving Issues in NIACs

• Classification Challenges: Determining whether an internal conflict meets the threshold of a NIAC can be contentious, as states often resist the classification of an internal situation as a NIAC, as it implies international oversight and legal obligations.
• Application to Non-State Actors: A central challenge is ensuring non-state armed groups comply with IHL. Although IHL binds these groups, enforcing accountability, particularly against splinter or loosely organized groups, remains difficult.
• Urban Warfare and Asymmetric Conflicts: NIACs increasingly involve urban settings, complicating the application of distinction and proportionality principles. Asymmetric tactics by non-state actors, such as the use of civilians as shields, pose significant challenges to ensuring compliance with IHL.

8. Conclusion Non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) are subject to specific rules and protections under International Humanitarian Law, primarily through Common Article 3 and Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions. These provisions set out minimum standards for the treatment of individuals and the conduct of hostilities, aiming to limit the effects of armed conflict on civilian populations and non-combatants. The domestic application of these rules, as seen in the Philippines, underscores the evolving challenges of applying IHL to conflicts involving non-state actors, while ensuring compliance and accountability.

War of National Liberation | Categories of Armed Conflicts | International Humanitarian Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

War of National Liberation under International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

Definition and Context
A War of National Liberation refers to an armed conflict in which a people fight against colonial domination, alien occupation, or racist regimes in the exercise of their right to self-determination. The concept was developed and recognized primarily during the decolonization period in the mid-20th century when peoples in Africa, Asia, and Latin America sought independence from colonial powers. These conflicts are distinct from traditional interstate wars or civil wars as they are fought to end oppression and gain sovereignty.

Under international law, wars of national liberation are not viewed as mere internal disturbances or rebellions but are afforded a special status due to their connection with the right to self-determination, a principle enshrined in various international instruments.

Legal Framework

1. Right to Self-Determination

• The right to self-determination is a fundamental principle of international law, recognized in Article 1(2) of the United Nations Charter and affirmed in Common Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). This right allows peoples to freely determine their political status and pursue economic, social, and cultural development.
• The wars of national liberation are directly connected to this principle as they are the means through which oppressed peoples, particularly under colonial or racist regimes, seek to exercise their right to self-determination.

2. Application of International Humanitarian Law

• The legal status of wars of national liberation is formally recognized in Additional Protocol I (AP I) to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, adopted in 1977. Article 1(4) of Additional Protocol I extends the application of IHL to include:

  "armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right to self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations."

• This inclusion means that participants in such wars must be treated as combatants under IHL, provided they comply with the conditions set forth in the Geneva Conventions and Protocols. The application of jus in bello (laws of war) ensures protection for both combatants and civilians.

• Recognition as a "war of national liberation" under AP I confers legitimacy to the belligerents, granting them the status of lawful combatants and allowing them to receive prisoner of war (POW) status if captured.

3. Combatant Status

• For members of forces fighting in a war of national liberation to be treated as lawful combatants and entitled to POW status upon capture, they must fulfill the criteria outlined in Article 43 of Additional Protocol I, which requires that:

  1. They are under a command responsible for the actions of their subordinates.
  2. They have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance.
  3. They carry arms openly.
  4. They conduct operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

• Combatants in such conflicts are expected to comply with international humanitarian law, including rules on the protection of civilians, the treatment of prisoners of war, and restrictions on the means and methods of warfare.

4. Non-International Armed Conflicts vs. Wars of National Liberation

• Prior to the recognition provided by Additional Protocol I, wars of national liberation were often classified as non-international armed conflicts, falling under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which applies minimum humanitarian standards to internal conflicts.

• However, with the inclusion of wars of national liberation in AP I, such conflicts are now recognized as international armed conflicts (IACs), even if they involve fighting between a colonial power and a national liberation movement within the same state.

• This distinction is crucial because international armed conflicts are subject to a more comprehensive set of rules under IHL, offering greater protection to the participants and civilians involved in the conflict.

5. Obligations of States and Non-State Actors

• States that are parties to the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I are obligated to respect the legal framework of wars of national liberation. They must provide humane treatment to all persons not actively participating in hostilities, including detained combatants and civilians.
• National liberation movements, if they claim to act in conformity with international law and seek recognition as legitimate participants in a war of national liberation, are also bound by the same rules of IHL.

6. Legal Challenges and Controversies

• While Additional Protocol I provides a legal framework for wars of national liberation, the recognition of such conflicts has been controversial. Some states, particularly former colonial powers, have resisted this recognition, arguing that it legitimizes what they perceive as terrorist activities or insurgencies.

• The classification of a conflict as a war of national liberation can also be politically sensitive, as it involves recognizing the right of a group to self-determination, which may conflict with a state’s territorial integrity and sovereignty.

• Moreover, not all states are parties to Additional Protocol I, and some have made reservations to the application of Article 1(4). For instance, the United States has not ratified AP I and has expressed concerns that the recognition of wars of national liberation could be misused to justify armed violence by non-state actors.

7. Role of the United Nations

• The United Nations General Assembly has played a significant role in supporting wars of national liberation, particularly during the decolonization era. In its Resolution 1514 (XV), the General Assembly declared that all peoples have the right to self-determination and that colonialism should be brought to an end.
• The Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (1960) reinforced this, and subsequent General Assembly resolutions have recognized the legitimacy of struggles against colonialism, foreign occupation, and apartheid.
• The Security Council, however, has been more conservative in its approach, focusing primarily on maintaining international peace and security rather than endorsing specific struggles for self-determination.

8. Examples of Wars of National Liberation

• Historically, several conflicts have been categorized as wars of national liberation, including:
  1. The Algerian War of Independence (1954-1962) against French colonial rule.
  2. The struggle against apartheid in South Africa, supported by various liberation movements such as the African National Congress (ANC).
  3. The Vietnam War (1955-1975), where the Viet Minh and later the Viet Cong fought against colonial powers and the regime they viewed as a puppet of foreign interests.
  4. The Palestinian struggle against Israeli occupation, which some argue falls under the framework of a war of national liberation, though it remains highly contested in international forums.

Conclusion

Wars of national liberation are a distinctive category of armed conflicts under international humanitarian law, recognized for their connection to the right of peoples to self-determination. Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions provides the legal basis for treating such conflicts as international armed conflicts, thereby extending the full scope of IHL protections to both combatants and civilians involved. However, the recognition of these wars remains a politically sensitive and legally complex issue, particularly when states are reluctant to acknowledge the legitimacy of such struggles.

Dispute Resolution | Categories of Armed Conflicts | International Humanitarian Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

Dispute Resolution under International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

Dispute resolution in the context of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is critical in ensuring compliance with the laws governing armed conflicts. Dispute resolution mechanisms aim to address violations of IHL, interpret its provisions, and provide remedies for breaches. Under IHL, dispute resolution takes several forms, ranging from diplomatic negotiations to judicial remedies. Below is an exhaustive discussion of the relevant mechanisms and legal frameworks involved:

---

I. Legal Framework for Dispute Resolution under IHL

The primary sources of International Humanitarian Law are the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols (1977), which contain provisions related to dispute resolution. Other key instruments include the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the United Nations (UN) Charter, and customary international law. The dispute resolution mechanisms under IHL can be grouped into non-judicial and judicial processes.

II. Non-Judicial Methods of Dispute Resolution

Non-judicial methods primarily involve diplomatic or quasi-diplomatic approaches to resolving disputes concerning violations of IHL. These mechanisms seek to restore compliance through cooperation, negotiation, and engagement rather than punishment.

A. Protecting Powers

Protecting powers are third states that are designated by the warring parties to safeguard the interests of one belligerent party in the territory of another. Article 5 of the Geneva Conventions authorizes the use of protecting powers to facilitate communication and dispute resolution between belligerents. Their functions include:

1. Overseeing compliance with IHL by the parties in conflict.
2. Offering good offices to mediate disputes and to negotiate settlements.
3. Assisting with repatriation of prisoners of war (POWs) and other humanitarian issues.

Protecting powers play a crucial role in resolving conflicts and upholding the principles of humanitarian law, especially when formal legal mechanisms are not readily accessible.

B. International Fact-Finding Commission (IFC)

Established under Article 90 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, the International Fact-Finding Commission (IFC) investigates alleged breaches of IHL. This commission is composed of experts who can:

1. Investigate serious violations of IHL upon the request of one or more parties to a conflict.
2. Facilitate fact-finding missions to ascertain the facts of a dispute and report on violations.
3. Promote conciliation by helping parties reach a mutual understanding of the facts and encouraging settlements.

Although its use has been limited, the IFC remains an available mechanism for addressing IHL violations.

C. Good Offices, Mediation, and Conciliation

International organizations, neutral states, and third-party actors may offer good offices or act as mediators to assist in resolving disputes. These processes are non-binding and aim to foster communication and negotiation between warring parties. Some key elements include:

• Good offices: Facilitating dialogue between the disputing parties without becoming directly involved.
• Mediation: A neutral third party actively participates in negotiations to help resolve disputes.
• Conciliation: A more structured form of mediation, where conciliators may propose solutions to the disputing parties after an inquiry into the matter.

III. Judicial Methods of Dispute Resolution

Judicial processes involve formal legal proceedings before international or national courts to resolve disputes related to violations of IHL.

A. International Court of Justice (ICJ)

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, with jurisdiction over disputes between states, including those involving violations of IHL. States can bring cases against other states to the ICJ on matters such as:

1. Interpretation and application of IHL treaties, including the Geneva Conventions.
2. Accountability for state-sponsored violations of IHL.
3. Advisory opinions on legal issues relating to armed conflict.

For instance, in the Nicaragua Case (1986), the ICJ examined violations of IHL, including unlawful use of force and breaches of customary international law.

B. International Criminal Court (ICC)

The International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes individuals responsible for serious violations of IHL, particularly war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity, under the Rome Statute. The ICC may exercise jurisdiction over:

1. War crimes, which include grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, such as intentional killing, torture, and targeting civilians.
2. Crimes against humanity and genocide that occur during armed conflicts.
3. Referral by the UN Security Council or state parties under its jurisdiction.

The ICC plays a significant role in promoting accountability and deterrence of IHL violations by holding individuals criminally responsible.

C. Ad Hoc International Criminal Tribunals

In addition to the ICC, ad hoc criminal tribunals have been established to prosecute individuals for violations of IHL during specific conflicts. Examples include:

1. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which prosecuted war crimes committed during the Yugoslav Wars.
2. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), which addressed the genocide and war crimes committed during the Rwandan genocide in 1994.

These tribunals have contributed significantly to the development of jurisprudence in international humanitarian law.

D. National Courts and Universal Jurisdiction

Many states have enacted national legislation that incorporates IHL into their domestic legal systems, allowing their national courts to prosecute IHL violations. In addition, under the principle of universal jurisdiction, states can prosecute individuals for war crimes and other serious violations of IHL, regardless of where the crime was committed and the nationality of the perpetrator or the victim. Notable examples include:

1. Spain's attempts to prosecute former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet under universal jurisdiction for human rights violations.
2. Various European states prosecuting war criminals from the Rwandan genocide and Yugoslav Wars.

E. Human Rights Courts

In some instances, regional human rights courts, such as the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, may have jurisdiction over cases involving violations of IHL when those violations intersect with fundamental human rights protections. These courts can hold states accountable for breaches that occur during armed conflict, particularly where they overlap with human rights treaties such as the European Convention on Human Rights.

IV. Arbitration and International Commissions of Inquiry

A. Arbitration

Arbitration is another judicial method of resolving disputes, often used in conjunction with other mechanisms. Parties to a conflict may agree to submit their dispute to an arbitration panel, which then issues a binding decision. Arbitration has been used in the context of IHL violations, particularly in boundary disputes or claims for reparations.

B. International Commissions of Inquiry

International Commissions of Inquiry are temporary bodies established to investigate specific allegations of violations of IHL and recommend measures to resolve disputes. These commissions typically investigate facts, gather evidence, and propose solutions. Examples include:

1. The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, which investigates violations of IHL and human rights law in Syria.
2. The UN Human Rights Council’s investigations into the armed conflicts in the Central African Republic and Yemen.

V. Compliance Mechanisms and Enforcement

To ensure compliance with IHL, various monitoring and enforcement mechanisms exist, including the roles of the UN Security Council, UN peacekeeping missions, and international sanctions regimes. The Security Council, under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, may authorize sanctions, peacekeeping operations, or military interventions to address breaches of IHL.

Moreover, civil society organizations and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) play vital roles in monitoring compliance with IHL, providing humanitarian assistance, and advocating for accountability in cases of violations.

---

Conclusion

Dispute resolution mechanisms under International Humanitarian Law are diverse and comprehensive, involving both non-judicial and judicial approaches. From diplomatic measures like protecting powers and mediation to formal adjudication by international and national courts, these mechanisms serve to address and remedy violations of IHL. As IHL continues to evolve, ensuring the effective resolution of disputes and enforcing compliance with humanitarian norms remains essential to mitigating the impact of armed conflicts and protecting vulnerable populations.

War Crimes, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity | International Humanitarian Law | PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

War Crimes, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity under International Humanitarian Law

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), often referred to as the "laws of war," governs the conduct of armed conflicts. Its primary aim is to limit the effects of war on people and property. Specifically, IHL seeks to protect individuals who are not or no longer participating in hostilities (such as civilians, medical personnel, and prisoners of war), and it restricts the means and methods of warfare. A critical area of IHL addresses the commission of serious violations such as war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity.

1. War Crimes

War crimes refer to serious violations of the laws and customs of war. These crimes are defined in various international legal instruments, such as the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Elements of War Crimes: To constitute a war crime, the following elements must generally be present:

• A state of armed conflict (international or non-international);
• The perpetrator’s actions must be in violation of IHL norms; and
• The act must involve grave breaches, such as targeting civilians, inhumane treatment of prisoners of war, or destroying protected objects.

Examples of War Crimes:

• Wilful killing of civilians or combatants who are hors de combat (out of combat);
• Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
• Unlawful deportation or transfer, and unlawful confinement of a civilian population;
• Targeting non-combatants, including civilians, medical personnel, and aid workers;
• Hostage-taking;
• Sexual violence, including rape and forced prostitution;
• Attacks on protected objects, such as schools, hospitals, and religious sites;
• Use of prohibited weapons, such as chemical and biological agents.

Under the Rome Statute, individuals, including military leaders and political officials, can be held personally liable for committing war crimes.

2. Genocide

Genocide is a particularly heinous crime, defined as acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) and the Rome Statute define genocide and list acts that can constitute the crime.

Elements of Genocide:

• Intent: The specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a group based on nationality, ethnicity, race, or religion. This distinguishes genocide from other crimes against humanity, which do not require this intent to destroy a particular group.
• Acts: Any of the following acts can constitute genocide if committed with genocidal intent:
  • Killing members of the group;
  • Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  • Deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s physical destruction;
  • Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  • Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Key Cases of Genocide:

• The Holocaust: The systematic extermination of six million Jews by Nazi Germany.
• Rwanda (1994): The massacre of around 800,000 Tutsis by the Hutu-majority government.
• Srebrenica (1995): The mass killing of over 8,000 Bosniak men and boys by Bosnian Serb forces.

Under the Genocide Convention, states have a duty to prevent and punish genocide, and the ICC can prosecute individuals responsible for the crime.

3. Crimes Against Humanity

Crimes against humanity refer to widespread or systematic attacks directed against civilians. These crimes may occur during peace or armed conflict, unlike war crimes, which require an armed conflict context. The Rome Statute and customary international law are the primary sources defining and prosecuting these crimes.

Elements of Crimes Against Humanity:

• The acts must be committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population;
• There must be knowledge of the attack;
• The attack can occur during war or peacetime.

Examples of Crimes Against Humanity:

• Murder;
• Extermination (including intentional deprivation of food and medicine);
• Enslavement, including trafficking in persons;
• Deportation or forcible transfer of populations;
• Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty;
• Torture;
• Rape and other forms of sexual violence (forced prostitution, forced pregnancy, forced sterilization);
• Persecution on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, or gender grounds;
• Enforced disappearance of persons;
• Apartheid.

The distinction between crimes against humanity and war crimes is crucial. While war crimes require a nexus to armed conflict, crimes against humanity do not. They are broader in scope and can include actions such as apartheid and enforced disappearances, which may not directly relate to an armed conflict.

4. Prosecution and Accountability

International Criminal Court (ICC): The Rome Statute established the ICC in 1998 to prosecute individuals for the most serious international crimes: genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression. The ICC operates based on the principle of complementarity, meaning it can only prosecute cases where national courts are unable or unwilling to do so.

• Jurisdiction: The ICC can exercise jurisdiction if the crime was committed in a state that is a party to the Rome Statute or if the accused is a national of a state party. Additionally, the UN Security Council can refer situations to the ICC.
• Individual Responsibility: Under international criminal law, individuals can be held personally accountable for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. This includes political leaders, military commanders, and others who give orders or participate in such acts.
• Command Responsibility: Military commanders and superiors can be held liable for crimes committed by forces under their control if they knew or should have known about the crimes and failed to prevent or punish the perpetrators.

Ad hoc International Tribunals: Several ad hoc international tribunals have been established to prosecute war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. These include:

• International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which dealt with crimes committed during the Balkan conflicts;
• International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), which prosecuted those responsible for the 1994 Rwandan genocide.

National Courts: States also have the duty to prosecute war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows states to prosecute these crimes regardless of where they were committed and regardless of the nationality of the perpetrator or victim.

5. Philippines’ Legal Framework and Obligations

The Philippines, as a state party to the Rome Statute until its withdrawal in 2019, had incorporated international humanitarian law principles into its domestic legal framework. The country enacted Republic Act No. 9851, also known as the Philippine Act on Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, and Other Crimes Against Humanity, which provides for the prosecution of these crimes within the Philippines.

Key Provisions of RA 9851:

• The Act mirrors the definitions found in international law for war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity.
• It establishes the legal basis for prosecuting individuals in the Philippines who commit serious violations of IHL, genocide, and crimes against humanity, whether in the context of international or non-international armed conflict.
• RA 9851 also includes provisions on the responsibility of commanders and other superiors for crimes committed by subordinates under their effective authority and control.
• The Philippine Supreme Court is the final arbiter in ensuring that the Philippines complies with its international obligations, including IHL and human rights law.

In summary, war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity are serious violations of international law. States, including the Philippines, are bound by international treaties and customary law to prevent and prosecute these crimes. International bodies, such as the ICC, play a pivotal role in ensuring accountability, while domestic laws provide a framework for national prosecution.