The Unforeseen Humanitarian Law Implications of the NATO Intervention in Libya

The Unforeseen Humanitarian Law Implications of the NATO Intervention in Libya

Authors Kesolofetse Lefenya, Ilyayambwa Mwanawina

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: Lecturer of Law, Faculty of Law, North West University; Lecturer of Law, Faculty of Law, North West University
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2015, p. 59 – 78

Abstract

Gaddhafi’s forty-two-year rule in Libya ended after uprisings against his government led to a civil war and eventually intervention by the international community. On 31 March 2011, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) reported to the international community that it had overall command of international military operations over Libya and that the aim of NATO actions was to protect civilians and civilian-populated areas from attack or the threat of attack. This article seeks to highlight the miscarriages of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), in particular the Third Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. The article will canvass the capture and murder of Gaddhafi, in that way highlighting the breaches of another body of law, namely International Human Rights Law. It is assumed that, because of the involvement of international parties, the nature of the conflict which started as a civil war turned into a conflict with enough international elements to bring it under the purview of the Geneva Conventions. The common underlying purpose of international humanitarian law and international human rights law is the protection of the life, health and dignity of human beings, regardless of circumstances. It is therefore not surprising that the content of some of the rules is similar. Both bodies of law aim, for example, to protect human life, prohibit torture or cruel treatment, process, include provisions for the protection of women and children and regulate aspects of the right to food and health. On that note, the two bodies of law must ensure to uphold and protect their core objectives and principles, thereby preventing similar atrocity cases like the Gaddhafi matter in future.

Contemporary Conflicts and Protection Gaps in International Humanitarian Law: The Necessity and Practical Utility of Fundamental Standards of Humanity

Contemporary Conflicts and Protection Gaps in International Humanitarian Law: The Necessity and Practical Utility of Fundamental Standards of Humanity

Authors Brian Sang YK

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: None
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2015, p. 24 – 58

Abstract

International humanitarian law (IHL), applicable to armed conflict, is coming up against the inevitable challenges of the times because the nature of and participants in contemporary conflicts differ considerably from that in the conflicts of yesteryear. IHL traditionally sought to regulate the conduct of, and damage caused by, armed conflict between rather than within states. Contemporary conflicts are far more likely to be internal rather than international and thus entail the presence, to a large extent, of non-state actors, whether as combatants or victims. The recent history of conflicts reveals that internal armed conflicts and other situations of internal violence of lesser intensity, namely internal disturbances and tensions, are the most common forms of violence today. This high incidence of such conflicts poses major problems for legal regulation and protection of individuals from abuses related to the associated violence. The apparent inadequacy of international law in effectively protecting individuals caught up in grey-zone conflicts generally and the right to life in particular makes clear the necessity to fill the protection gaps. This article asks whether common elements in human rights law and IHL can be identified and articulated as fundamental standards of humanity that ought to apply along the entire spectrum of violence (from internal tensions to fully-fledged civil war), regardless of the formal classification of such situations. Its thesis is that fundamental standards of humanity can offer a means to ensure that grey-zone conflicts are subject to regulatory norms of international law pursuant to which individuals caught up in the violence can be better protected.

The History and Development of the Law of Armed Conflict (Part II)

The History and Development of the Law of Armed Conflict (Part II)

Authors Arthur van Coller

ISSN: 2521-2621
Affiliations: Senior lecturer, Nelson R Mandela School of Law, University of Fort Hare
Source: African Yearbook on International Humanitarian Law, 2015, p. 1 – 23

Abstract

This paper is Part II in a two-part series, and continues the investigation into the history of armed conflict and its influence on the development of the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). Part I considered the early history of armed conflict and its implications on the development of the LOAC. The historical events leading up to The Hague Peace Conference of 1907 has shown that the development of armed conflict is closely linked to scientific, military and industrial technology. Part II considers the development of armed conflict during the subsequent time period from 1907 to the present day. The paper concludes with some prognostic observations. Thus, the developments in the LOAC reflect an attempt to regulate specific weapons that have developed as a result of technological advancements. Fifth-generation warfare will see new dimensions and perspectives regarding the options available to military and political commanders and will be decidedly influenced by information dominance through sustained cyber technologies and military force.