HUMAN RIGHTS IN TIMES OF ARMED CONFLICTS

Ewa Salkiewicz-Munnerlyn

Abstract


The present contribution deals with the issue of human rights in armed conflicts versus the concept of war. This distinction was made in Article 2, and the same in all four Geneva Convention of 1949. In this article, the distinction is made between the universal system of human rights and the International Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflicts (IHLAC). The difference of application between these two sets of law relies on the fact, that the universal agreements of human rights always apply, both in armed conflict and peace when the IHLAC applies only in times of armed conflicts. There is a difference between them in the regulation. Human rights regulate the relationship between the state and persons under its jurisdiction, regardless of their nationality and the IHLAC applies to states and individuals or armed groups distinguishing between a civilian or a veteran. About the compliance control, it is a different system too, for the IHLAC, it is the ICRC and criminal tribunals, and for human rights, there are different committees of tribunals like the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The exam of the jurisprudence of the ECtHR shows, that it does not make a distinction between a state of war and peace, which is called the humanization of the law of armed conflicts. Also, the very important question of the fragmentation of international law is examined, based on the jurisprudence of the ICJ.

Keywords


International humanitarian law, the law of armed conflict, extraterritorial application of human rights, lex specialis, humanization of the law of war.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Council of Europe. (1977). European Convention on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms of November 4, 1950 (Vol. 61). Strasbourg: European Court of Human Rights.

ICJ. (1996). Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996, p. 226 § 25. International Court of Justice.

ICJ. (2004). Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Advisory Opinion, I. C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136. International Court of Justice.

ICJ. (2005). Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2005, p. 168, § 216. International Court of Justice.

ICRC. (n.d.). Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries. Retrieved from International Committee of the Red Cross: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/applic/ihl/ihl.nsf/vwTreatiesByDate.xsp

UN. (1967). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 16.12.1966, JoL of 1977, No. 38, item 167. United Nations. Retrieved from United Nations: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Treaties/1976/01/19760103%2009-57%20PM/Ch_IV_03.pdf

UN. (2006). Fragmentation of international law: difficulties arising from the diversification and expansion of international law A/CN.4/L.682 13 April 2006. INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION. Geneva: United Nations. doi:10.18356/ed47d916-en

UNGA. (1948, 12 10). Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) resolution 217 A (III), A/RES/3/217 A. Retrieved from United Nations: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_217(III).pdf

UNGA. (1966, 12 16). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - resolution 2200A (XXI). Retrieved from United Nations Human Rights: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx

UNHR. (1976, 03 23). Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights - resolution 2200A (XXI). Retrieved from United Nations Human Rights: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/opccpr1.aspx


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.