![]() However, States have not taken this approach and they believe that the issue is one of how mines are used. It could be argued that mines are indiscriminate by nature because their effects cannot be limited as required by the law even if the mines are aimed at military objectives the civilian casualties are usually excessive because of the long life of mines and the inability of a mine to distinguish between a civilian and a soldier Clearly, as with rifles, mines are capable of being used against civilians but are not necessarily so used. The issue of whether anti-personnel land mines are of a nature to strike military and civilian persons and objects without distinction is a matter of quite some debate. (c) those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol Īnd consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction. (b) those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective or (a) those which are not directed as a specific military objective Its most recent expression, which reflects customary law, is found in Article 51 of the First Additional Protocol of 1977: The rule of distinction between military and civilian persons and objects is a fundamental principle of humanitarian law. Protection of Civilians/Prohibition of Indiscriminate Attacks The following summary will be based primarily on rules found in the Geneva Conventions and their Protocols which integrated and developed the norms of the Hague Conventions. To the extent that these agreements codified existing customary law their obligations apply to all States, irrespective of whether they have ratified the particular Conventions or Protocols themselves. The predominant body of international humanitarian law is contained in the Hague Conventions of 18, in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and in the two Protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions, adopted in 1977. Although there is a certain amount of compromise in humanitarian law, clear and stringent rules do exist, even if their implementation is all too often woefully, even tragically, inadequate. Ignoring humanitarian imperatives would have left warfare completely unrestrained, while discounting military requirements would have made humanitarian law appear unworkable and irrelevant to the conduct of hostilities. In virtually every case the prerequisite was to achieve a balance between humanitarian concerns and what was considered to be military necessity. International humanitarian law, formerly known as the laws of war, has been codified since the la te nineteenth century through numerous diplomatic conferences which have addressed certain methods and means of war which were considered to violate the conscience of humanity. The Basis of International Humanitarian law The October 1995 Review Conference of the 1980 Convention provides the international community with a unique opportunity to reassert and strengthen humanitarian norms in the face of the current land mine crisis. However, a blatant disregard for humanitarian principles on the part of many warring parties, coupled with severe weaknesses in the 1980 Conventional Weapons Convention and a lack of international response, have led to a situation which threatens the credibility of both the Convention and broader humanitarian principles. If existing international humanitarian law were faithfully applied, the current indiscriminate use of land mines would not have occurred. In particular it seeks to protect civilians and other non-combatants. Humanitarian law seeks to reduce the suffering caused by armed conflict to the minimum necessary for the achievement of legitimate military objectives. The use of land mines is regulated by both customary international humanitarian law and by the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of the ICRC. Louise Doswald-Beck serves as Senior Legal Adviser and Peter Herby as Arms Control Adviser in the Legal Division of the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |