Search

The concept of the levée en masse was designed to legitimise armed civilian opposition to an unfolding invasion by conferring temporary combatant status upon certain civilians. The range of individuals eligible for this status was defined narrowly to include only ‘inhabitants’ of invaded territories. This approach made sense in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries when international travel was beyond the reach of all but the elite minority. Today however, mass air transit has expanded horizons and allows people to travel and to emigrate much more readily. Consequently, the global diaspora of emigrants is larger now than ever before. As seen during the Russian invasion of Ukraine beginning in February 2022, many among these diaspora communities wish to return to defend their homelands upon invasion. This is precluded under the orthodox interpretation of international humanitarian law owing to their lack of residency. This is unsatisfactory as it bars individuals with legitimate familial, political, cultural, and historical connections to a State from participating in a levée in its defence. This article sets out the policy and legal arguments in favour of recognising non-resident citizens – or ‘diaspora fighters’ – as legitimate participants in levées en masse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rule of proportionality strikes a bargain in launching attacks. It demands that military commanders suspend or cancel operations if collateral damage anticipated from an attack exceeds the potential military advantage offered. The definitional phrase military advantage has been the subject of a rich debate, varyingly interpreted to expand or limit the scope of attacks. This paper participates in the debate, advocating that military advantage must be limited to exclude attacks on objects that indirectly contribute to military potential, such as, economic, social, psychological or political advantage, which invariably target civilians or civilian enterprises. It critically engages with the principles and precedents invoked to legitimise a broader understanding of military advantage. It posits that such attacks disregard belligerents’ privileges, and render unbound categories of civilian objects susceptible to destruction. Pursuantly, the rule of proportionality, originally articulated to nuance and improve the rule of distinction, is usurped to violate the latter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the critical issue of detainee protection in the complex landscape of contemporary non-international armed conflicts and counterterrorism operations. It examines the interplay between international humanitarian law and international human rights law, highlighting the challenges in their application and interpretation. The article delves into the contemporary challenges faced in protecting detainees, including the involvement of non-state armed groups, extraterritorial detention practices, administrative detention, and the impact of counterterrorism measures. It proposes a multifaceted approach to enhancing detainee protection, encompassing strategies for strengthening compliance with the legal framework, addressing the specific needs of vulnerable groups, and promoting best practices and capacity-building. The article argues that a comprehensive and contextualised approach, grounded in the principles of humanity and human dignity, is essential to effectively safeguard the rights and well-being of detainees in these challenging contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Belligerent reprisals are a controversial and largely discredited mechanism for the enforcement of international humanitarian law. Additional Protocol i of 1977 prohibits a range of reprisal activity, including reprisals against enemy civilians. A (relatively small) number of States are not Parties to Additional Protocol i, whilst some States Parties have made declarations and/or reservations to the Protocol which could be seen as attempts to limit the operation of the prohibition. Its status as a rule of customary international law is therefore an important question. This article argues that opposition to the prohibition in customary law is neither as widespread nor consistent as has previously been suggested and that the weight of evidence points towards the existence (or development) of a customary prohibition. Consistent opposition by the UK and the US, however, makes it unlikely that the customary prohibition would be opposable to those particular States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 4 August 2022, Amnesty International published its report 'Ukraine: Ukrainian Fighting Tactics Endanger Civilians', in which it accused Ukraine of violating international humanitarian law 'by establishing bases and operating weapons systems in populated residential areas, including in schools and hospitals' and in this way putting civilians at risk. According to the report, '[s]uch tactics violate international humanitarian law and endanger civilians, as they turn civilian objects into military targets. The ensuing Russian strikes in populated areas have killed civilians and destroyed civilian infrastructure'. The report sparked some controversies. The question that the author attempts to answer in this article is whether there are any factual or legal arguments supporting the conclusions of the report. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article reflects on the UN response to the earthquakes in Türkiye and Syria in February 2023, and specifically the fact that while the UN responded immediately in southern Türkiye, it did not do so in non-government-controlled northwest Syria. The UN explained that its 'longstanding position' was that aid could not be delivered across an international border without host government consent or Security Council authorisation. This article seeks to understand this position. It reviews the law applicable to cross-border humanitarian assistance, and the guidelines and tools that shape the UN's emergency response. It argues that international law allows cross-border humanitarian assistance without host State consent; however, that the UN's guidelines and tools do not facilitate the provision of assistance in such a scenario. The article concludes by calling for a review of the law, policies and guidelines that shape the way the UN responds to rapid-onset disasters in conflict contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article argues that the gendered constitution of the regulation of war runs even deeper than typically understood. Instead of merely the laws of war's internal categories being gendered, it is the entire apparatus of war's regulation as expressed in various versions of its denomination that manifests different shades of gender. Specifically, the article shows how the laws of war emerged as the hegemonic masculine synthesis between different conceptions of manhood, from the most unconstrained to the most chivalrous. As that compromise has been challenged by more 'feminine' approaches, this has triggered repeated reassertions of the regulation of war's inherently masculine character. The article speculates about the staying power of the masculine script of war through law at the intersection of misogyny, racism and the politics of legal expertise. It concludes by reflecting on what it might mean to transcend the implicit heteronormativity of the regulation of war by queering its categories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article traces the expansion of international law from the Hague Conventions, where only a state's soldiers had legal status, to the contemporary understanding that international law governs all participants in conflict. This can be seen as a humanitarian shift that diminishes state power. This article, however, argues that the Hague Conventions only established a limited sphere of formal law because delegates deliberately left free-fighters outside the law, to be governed by their own will and moral code. In doing so, delegates echoed a philosophical tradition that situates true freedom outside the state. As this article shows, the expansion of law to include such fighters required the replacement of such alternative codes with a renewed and extended range of formal legal criteria. As such, the expansion of international law to the realm outside the state has led to a reaffirmation of that law which is synonymous with the state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The modern laws of war are an integral foundation of 19th century efforts to establish and maintain order within the then emerging international society of states. But membership was conditional; only 'civilised' states were permitted entry to international society. Engaging with the concept of 'the standard of civilisation', the aim of this paper is to demonstrate a continuity of double standards as they relate to protections afforded by the modern laws of war. It will argue that these double standards have been, and continue to be, underpinned by attempts to de-humanise belligerents via the language of the 'standard of civilisation'. In making this argument, the paper will draw attention to the historical centrality of the state and the role it has played in establishing conditionality with regards to protections afforded by the modern laws of war through the language of raison d'état and the standard of civilisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The body of international law that regulates the conduct of armed conflicts has been known, at various points in time, as the law of war, the law of armed conflict, and international humanitarian law. While 'the law of war' was a term widely used in State practice throughout the 18th and 19th centuries, both 'the law of armed conflict' and 'international humanitarian law' were terms introduced in the 20th century by one organisation: the International Committee of the Red Cross. In this paper, we use international law and corpus linguistic tools in a pilot study, examining how the terms were first introduced into international law and how quickly they were incorporated (if at all) into the practice of States. Using the ongoing conflict involving Israel and its neighbours, this pilot study charts the appearance and recurrence of these terms in the practice of States in the United Nations to examine how the terms were received and used. We conclude by offering some initial assessments, noting that, while the terms were largely considered unproblematic at their introduction, practice in relation to their deployment suggests deep tensions regarding the nature and purpose of the law and how and when it applies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In years past, much of the discussion around International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law has been dedicated to considering the convergence of the two regimes; to discover a way to increase respect for the protection of the individual in armed conflict. Meanwhile, egregious violations of individual's human rights continue to occur in armed conflicts – those in Ukraine, Yemen, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, and many others. This paper surveys the relationship between the two international disciplines, and considers that though IHL and IHRL are two regimes that have different aims, both contain norms that strive for the protection of the individual in armed conflict. Ultimately, this paper argues that protection of individuals in armed conflict can be strengthened by importing IHL norms into the IHRL framework. This cross-pollination allows treaty bodies to interpret, and make comments about, State Parties' adherence to IHL that can increase respect for those norms, given IHRL's associated enforcement mechanisms and communications machinery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The faithful application of IHL during armed conflicts requires working on a variety of systems, structures and institutions that exist within a society, to ensure that the environment is conducive to respect for the law. Accordingly, there are many different roads to travel down, from developing and interpreting international legal rules to building adequate domestic frameworks, and from training armed actors on the rules applicable in warfare to working with communities affected by violence to ensure their voices are heard. This article aims to recognize the value of bringing different actors together, fostering complementarity among them and joining their forces towards the common aim of ensuring better respect for the law. Based on recent examples and studies in the field of IHL training, application and implementation, the article also aims to help humanitarian practitioners, armed actors, diplomats, legal scholars and others identify ways to work together and cross-fertilize their work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

States have been increasingly engaging in a practice of ex gratia payments during armed conflict as a way to win 'hearts and minds' or mitigate local animosity from combat operations that cause civilian loss or damage. These represent voluntary payments for damages which are not the result of a violation of the laws of war. This practice provides a contrast to reparations, which are the result of a legal obligation to remedy breaches of law. This article critically assesses how these two concepts interact with each other. Analysing the current practice, this work argues that ex gratia payments can represent another barrier for victims seeking redress. Crucial here is that these payments are seen as both an explicit and implicit waiver of any future claims. This ignores the potential for synergy between the two concepts on both moral and operational grounds. To better facilitate this potential synergy, this article takes inspiration from some of the human rights jurisprudence surrounding reparations programs and considers ex gratia payments in light of their standards instead of accepting them as a blanket waiver. This would align these payments better with both the operational and moral imperatives underlying these payments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One intersection between scholarship and practice in international humanitarian law is observable in international litigation concerning violations of the law of war. An interesting example in this regard recently arose in the case by the Democratic Republic of the Congo against Uganda for war-related claims. At the reparations phase, the Court decided not to rely solely on the submissions of the Parties, but to task certain scholars and other experts to answer evidentiary questions. Yet, when the Court's judgment was issued in February 2022, the role of these experts turned out to be almost negligible, with one significant exception. The overall lesson may be that – while the work of scholars can be highly important for claims practice relating to international humanitarian law – it has its limits, such as when proving and quantifying mass civil injury resulting from a lengthy and complex armed conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

René Provost's latest book, Rebel Courts: The Administration of Justice by Armed Insurgents , collects an impressive amount of practice of organized armed groups concerning the administration of justice in armed conflicts, and offers a detailed analysis of the legal issues surrounding the creation and functioning of insurgent courts. Drawing from field work and adopting a legal pluralistic methodology, Provost offers a comprehensive overview of how the rebel administration of justice functions in practice and of how international law regulates its different aspects, including the legality of rebel courts, due process guarantees, as well as international, transnational, and national recognition of the judicial practices of armed groups. In this review essay, I highlight the importance and novelty of Provost's approach, exploring the book's connections with other legal and non-legal literature on armed groups, and contextualize some of Provost's arguments concerning rebel law and rebel courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The historic Nuremberg trial represented a first step toward an adequate response by the international society to grave crimes under international law committed by individuals in position of governmental authority. This article discusses three particular ways in which the Nuremberg trial has advanced international justice. From a normative perspective, it has helped crystallise the principle of individual criminal responsibility for crimes under international law. Furthermore, the Nuremberg tribunal's extraordinary jurisdiction paved the way for domestic and international courts' jurisdiction over crimes under international law, while instigating the evolution of relevant law concerning immunity from jurisdiction. Finally, in associating international crimes with the maintenance of international peace and security, it allowed the UN system of collective security to consider situations involving the commission of those crimes as a threat to international peace and security, preventing impunity and promoting the efficacy of international humanitarian law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Syrian war has caused catastrophic damage to the lives and livelihoods of millions of people. Chemical attacks in particular have been tremendously devastating to both humans and wildlife ecosystems. Building on previous research in international humanitarian law (IHL) and the protection of the environment, this article identifies the immediate and long-term impact that the use and storage of chemical weapons has on the environment as against the shortcomings in legal coverage for the same. This article further argues that existing IHL provisions addressing the consequences of environmental warfare are fragmented at best, even when applied to a current case that most would consider to be highly applicable to IHL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

War and international humanitarian law (IHL) exist and evolve in a synergistic relationship. On the one hand, treaty and customary law norms can proactively shape warfare. But on the other, changes in the nature of warfare often determine IHL's path forward, for if IHL is to remain effective, it must remain responsive to the context in which it is to be applied. This article offers tentative reflections on how future conflict may affect the evolution of IHL's conduct of hostilities rules as applied to 'cyber capabilities'. It concludes that current and future cyber capabilities and vulnerabilities are driving the positions of States and the wider international community regarding cyber operations during armed conflict. In particular, it predicts movement in the direction of interpreting IHL rules restrictively, that is, in a manner that provides enhanced protection for the civilian population, sometimes at the expense of military advantage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review essay aims to consider the law of neutrality, and whether it may be better situated within the jus ad bellum , the body of law governing the use of force, or the jus in bello , the body of law governing hostilities following the initial use of force. In doing so, the essay centres on the recent monograph by Constantine Antonopoulos on the subject of the law of neutrality, wherein the author assures us that despite the legal innovations of the last century, the law of neutrality has remained squarely within the modern jus in bello. The present writer takes a somewhat different approach, although appreciates the doctrinal allure of keeping the law of neutrality separate from jus ad bellum considerations, particularly in the context of the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Do laws of war applicable to International Armed Conflicts (IAC s) authorize targeting and detention or do they simply regulate targeting and detention as an exercise of power in war by belligerents without providing authorization? This question has been the subject of debate in the recent past. The traditional understanding of laws of war, simply as a protective regime has come under increasing challenge from claims laws of war authorize targeting and detention in International Armed Conflicts. While these claims have mainly been made to establish in laws of war satisfaction for the requirement of Human rights law for a legal basis for targeting and detention, the transmutation of what in the perspective of laws of war is simply an exercise of power into legal permission has consequences beyond that relationship. It also impacts the relationship between laws of war and jus ad bellum, and more gravely it cloaks what is an otherwise exercise of brute power in war with the garb of legal competence. It transmutes what is simply might into right. The transmutation, re characterizes an IAC from the perspective of laws of war as simply a fact, into its legal construct. Therefore, this paper interrogates the nature of the laws of war, to show they simply regulate targeting and detention in IAC s without providing legal permission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses the legality of Western states providing weapons to Ukraine. It focuses on five areas of international law: (1) the jus ad bellum ; (2) the law of neutrality; (3) international humanitarian law; (4) state responsibility for complicity in internationally wrongful acts; and (5) international criminal law. It concludes that weapons transfers likely violate the law of neutrality, entitling Russia to respond with countermeasures; that Russia can lawfully target transferred weapons under IHL; and that weapons transfers could lead to state and individual responsibility if evidence comes to light that the Ukrainian military is using weapons previously supplied by the West to commit war crimes. By contrast, providing weapons to Ukraine does not violate the jus ad bellum because they are in service of Ukraine's right of self-defence against Russia and does not make the supplying states co-belligerents in Russia's international armed conflict with Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through ethnographic observations from international humanitarian work and interviews with humanitarian professionals, Joe Cropp's The Humanitarian Fix: Navigating Civilian Protection in Contemporary Wars engagingly describes the daily practice of humanitarian negotiation and persuasion. The book illustrates how the international humanitarian has morphed from the more classical neutral intermediary to emerge as a broker and translator with a toolbox of more official and less official reframings of international law and policy to grapple with local problems and persuade different actors. In this review essay, I highlight the hidden insight for international lawyers in Cropp's book regarding questions of universality and pluralism in international humanitarian law and the double-bind practitioners face: while these practices of translation look like an openness to pluralism in humanitarian law, within the current international framework, any translation by necessity re-emphasises how these reframings are not the law, and ultimately work as techniques to reinforce the authority and claimed universality of the central system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the 20th of December 1972, the Polish-flagged merchant vessel M/S Józef Conrad , anchored in the North Vietnam port of Haiphong, was hit by an air-delivered projectile in the Linebacker II air campaign, also referred to as the 'Christmas bombing'. The attack caused both loss of life and health among Polish sailors, and destroyed the ship itself. In 2020, the Polish Commissioner for Human Rights submitted a formal petition to the executive branch of the Polish government, highlighting that despite the fact that the act was a violation of the ICCPR and UDHR, neither legal actions nor diplomatic efforts were later undertaken on behalf of the victims. The statement of the High Commisioner did not examine the bombardment from the perspective of the law of air warfare, which is a pivotal precondition to determine the wrongfulness of the act in the light of international law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses specific provisions within the Greek legal order that guide the naval commander's conduct during an armed conflict at sea. It demonstrates that these provisions do not adequately satisfy the requirement to ensure respect for the law of naval warfare and to contribute to the discontinuance, during such times, of the violations of international rules on the assistance of persons in distress at sea by State organs. In this manner, it points to the necessity of an extensive discussion among legal scholars about the dissemination of international humanitarian law in Greece. This process could lead to the establishment of a comprehensive national military manual that would demonstrate the spirit of abidance to the obligation to respect and ensure respect for the rules of this law in Greece's maritime realm during peace and warfare, and play an instrumental role in the enhancement of safety for persons and objects at sea during naval conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the humanitarian effects of armed conflict are vast and transcend national boundaries, international law does not yet provide an adequate or comprehensive response to the suffering of victims of war. This article argues considerations of State sovereignty have shaped the development of international law on post-war redress, hindering the emergence of individual rights to reparations under international humanitarian law. Meanwhile, alternative models such as victim assistance, which largely preserve sovereignty, are emerging in pockets of international humanitarian law, such as weapons treaties. This article suggests that victim assistance offers a potential model for addressing the harm to victims of armed conflict more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The obligations of international humanitarian law are not limited to the attacker; the defender is also required to take steps to protect civilians from harm. The requirement to take precautions against the effects of attack requires the defender to minimize the risk that civilians and civilian objects will be harmed by enemy military operations. At its most basic, it obliges defenders to locate military installations away from civilians. Furthermore, where appropriate, the status of objects should be clearly marked. It is – somewhat counterintuitively – about making it easier for the attacker to select lawful targets by making visible the distinction between civilian objects and military objectives. The increasing importance of digital infrastructure to modern life may make complying with these precautionary obligations more complicated. Maintaining separation between military and civilian networks is challenging as both operate using at least some of the same infrastructure, relying on the same cables, systems, and electromagnetic spectrum. In addition, the speed at which operations against digital infrastructure can occur increases the difficulty of complying with the obligation – particularly if such operations involve a degree of automation or the use of artificial intelligence (AI). This paper sets out the source and extent of the obligation to take precautions against hostile military operations and considers how they might apply to digital infrastructure. As well as clarifying the extent of the obligation, it applies the obligation to take precautions against hostile military operations to digital infrastructure, giving examples of where systems designers are taking these obligations into account, and other examples of where they must. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During recent years, natural gas reserves have been located off the coast of Cyprus and their possible exploitation has drawn the attention of Turkey, which has been in occupation of Northern Cyprus for decades. This contribution explores whether the law of occupation could provide a legal basis for the exploitation by Turkey of Northern Cyprus' natural gas, specifically considering the prolonged nature of the occupation. It argues that Turkey is obliged to comply with the restrictive rules governing the use of natural resources in occupied territories. Furthermore, this contribution discusses the argument that during prolonged occupations an occupying power should be granted more leeway in imposing wider ranging initiatives to prevent the local population's developmental stagnation, including more extensive natural resource exploitation. However, this contribution argues that granting such leeway has the potential to entrench the authority of the occupant into a state of permanency under the guise of legitimacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

World Peace (And How We Can Achieve It) looks towards a future where there is increasingly optimistic engagement with the concept of peace. Bellamy assesses why the world is the way it is before making suggestions for how the world can achieve peace. Bellamy suggests world peace is achievable and in the final chapter constructs his articles for world peace. This review essay engages with several themes in the book looking at how the history of international law is framed by the author before assessing Bellamy's arguments in relation to the state and international organisations. Lastly, the essay casts a legal eye over the author's articles for world peace. The articles will be of particular interest to readers in international law as they are embedded in the existing systems and structures of the prevailing international system. However, the articles contain the important inclusion of individuals and the role they play in achieving world peace. World Peace allows international lawyers to think more deeply about peace and the points made in this essay raise some issues that may be further debated as scholars map the paths to peace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While disease outbreaks remain to a certain extent unforeseeable, international law provides a comprehensive legal framework requiring States to prevent their harmful consequences, effectively respond to ensuing health emergencies, and cooperate in achieving those aims. This contribution shows that, within this framework, many rules take the form of 'due diligence' obligations. Obligations of due diligence, albeit inherently flexible to accommodate different capabilities and circumstances, are binding on States. They impose a duty to act according to a standard of 'good governance': a State must employ its best efforts to realise certain common goals. At least five key sets of rules establishing due diligence duties are relevant to the COVID-19 outbreak: a) the 'no-harm' principle; b) international disaster law; c) the International Health Regulations; d) international human rights law; and e) international humanitarian law. We preliminarily identify some of the actions required from States to prevent new outbreaks and respond to the pandemic, whilst assessing compliance with applicable rules. We conclude that hard lessons learned during the current crisis should spur more decisive action to prevent and address future public health emergencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) goes to the heart of the debate on new warfare technologies: States, international organizations, non-governmental organizations and civil society at large have long been discussing the acceptability of 'autonomous killing'. The present contribution zooms in on the position held by the Holy See, exploring its content and the main arguments which support the call of a ban on such technology. Both diplomatic statements and doctrinal teachings will be tackled. Importantly, a solid argument for a prohibition of LAWS is based on the moral unacceptability of autonomous killing, which may assume also a legal standing through the so-called Martens Clause. The history and the actual content of the Clause will be analyzed in order to explore whether – and to what extent – it can be interpreted so as to offer a legal ground for rejecting LAWS. It will be argued that the Holy See is in a particularly fit position to advocate for a renewed appraisal of the Martens Clause that may help the pro-ban front to structure a more principled debate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does international law matter on the periphery, where potential subjects are marginalized with uncertain legal status and without lawmaking power? Under what conditions would international law matter among the actors on the periphery, to be accepted as law, remain relevant, and eventually be complied with? By adopting an interdisciplinary perspective from international law and international relations, this article assesses how international humanitarian law (IHL) is accepted and adhered to among the non-state armed actors (NSAAs). The author argues that international law matters on the periphery when two conditions are met. The first is when incentives of NSAAs are compatible with IHL's goal of restraint. The second is when the interpretation of IHL at the local level is consistent with international law at the global level. This article provides ample examples of NSAAs' words and deeds to illustrate the arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the role of international humanitarian law (IHL) and humanitarian principles in the discourse of humanitarian negotiation. The article is based on extensive, semi-structured interviews conducted with 53 humanitarian practitioners about their experiences engaging in negotiations in the field. The article proceeds in four parts. Part 1 discusses two key factors at play during humanitarian negotiation processes. The first factor is the counterpart's familiarity with relevant legal and normative frameworks. The second factor is the interests that can drive counterparts' behavior. Part 2 presents a framework for understanding how the interaction of these two factors – familiarity and interest-alignment – can shape the discourse of humanitarian negotiation. Part 3 addresses the impact of these same issues on the humanitarian side of the negotiation. In particular, there is the possibility that humanitarian actors themselves might also lack familiarity with IHL and/or humanitarian principles and might find that their interests exist in tension with humanitarian laws and principles. The final section offers concluding remarks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Review of the Red Cross , an academic journal produced by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and published by Cambridge University Press, traces its origins back more than 150 years. Throughout its existence, the publication has featured international humanitarian law (IHL) prominently. Because of this, it is possible to trace how the ICRC was communicating publicly about IHL since 1869, allowing researchers to draw conclusions about how that body of law has evolved. In this article, the authors divide the history of the Review into five time periods, looking at trends over time as IHL was established as a body of law, was expanded to address trends in the ways war was waged, was disseminated and promoted to the international community, and how it is interpreted in light of current conflicts. Based on the way the law has been represented in the Review , the authors draw conclusions about the evolution of the law itself over time, and lessons this may provide for those who seek to influence the future development of the law regulating armed conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pre-colonial African communities had a well-established system of human rights protection applicable to armed conflicts, which became lost as a result of the break-up of traditional societies. This paper will show that traditional rules can be revived and integrated into future conflict management efforts. The ancient authentically African roots of international humanitarian law (IHL) could serve as receptors forming the basis for IHL and human rights law dissemination. Listening to local communities and learning about their aspirations and cultural practices should inform the peacebuilding programmes which need to be introduced before the cessation of hostilities. In the long run, engaging the armed non-state actors in the development of norms, could help improve certainty and predictability of IHL. Recent efforts by Geneva Call comprising a study of indigenous cultural norms relating to civilians' protection in Mali underline the growing importance of integrating local approaches in IHL dissemination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (Da'esh) has put in place a governance system encompassing judicial structures to justify its grotesque violence. This paper seeks to evaluate the legitimacy of these courts under two complementary perspectives. Whereas establishing courts by an insurgent group during armed conflict should meet the requirements of international humanitarian law (IHL), because Da'esh claims to ground its laws on Islam, these courts should also follow the requirements of Islam as its constituting law. The paper starts with analysing whether international law entitles armed groups to establish their courts. It argues that although such courts are not prohibited at first glance under international law, they should meet the requirements of being regularly constituted while respecting minimum judicial guarantees. Since Da'esh has sought to found its legitimacy on Islam, the paper argues that Da'esh's interpretation of Islam is not compatible with any major schools of Islamic thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children enjoy special protection from the harms of armed conflict under international humanitarian law. While the protection of children in armed conflict has been widely researched with regard to recruitment and use of children in armed conflict, the research on protection of children from sexual violence has received less attention. In this paper I look at the protection of children in relation to sexual violence under international humanitarian law and its actualisation in the practise of international criminal courts and tribunals. I consider first how the protection of children from sexual violence under international humanitarian law made its way to Conventions. Second, I explore the case law of sexual violence as a war crime in international courts and tribunals and how the special protection of children is reflected in the case law. I argue that despite a gradual improvement, the provisions of the Conventions have not been recognised particularly well. While there have been cases in which more attention has been paid to sexual violence against children, the practice is mostly incoherent and sporadic: there exists a discrepancy between the Conventions, and the practice of international criminal courts and tribunals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

El Salvador remains one of the most violent countries in the world undergoing a murder epidemic. The blatant rise in social violence is driven mainly by gangs of the Northern Triangle countries (Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador), which frequently clash with governmental security forces. The situation legally blurred the lines between the law enforcement and armed conflict regimes. An insufficient amount of time has been dedicated to identifying the applicable international legal framework to El Salvador's extreme gang violence and its repression. Consequently, the country's categorization of violence has not been addressed. For this purpose, a contextual background narration of the politics of violence in the country followed by a detailed analysis of the constituent elements of El Salvador's urban violence were examined. The assessment of facts and their juxtaposition to international jurisprudential criteria and doctrinal contributions on conflict classification suggest the situation reached international humanitarian law's armed conflict brink. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the regime applicable to the return of remains of combatants in international armed conflict is well known, the regime applicable in non-international armed conflicts is less clear. This is particularly the case when the members of armed groups are deemed to be 'terrorists' by the State which then refuses to return them to their families. The article examines how a Russian law to that effect has been examined and found wanting by the European Court of Human Rights. It suggests that the return of remains following non-international armed conflicts raises characteristic issues for the debate on the simultaneous and competing applicability of international humanitarian and international human rights law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Microsoft's 2017 call for a Digital Geneva Convention is a welcome contribution to the debate on how the global technology sector and the international civil society should respond to increased State-led cyberattacks. However, Microsoft's portrayal of cyberspace as a space devoid of regulation is inaccurate, especially in light of the rules contained in the Tallinn Manual 2.0. Microsoft's call for the establishment of an international attribution organization overlooks existing international legal mechanisms. The characterization of global technology firms as 'first responders' providing services akin to those provided by the Red Cross societies is imperfect since technology companies are, compared to the Red Cross, non-neutral and profit-making enterprises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The persistent anthropomorphism of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) as the replacement for human soldiers creates irrelevant expectations of physical embodiment and cognitive individualization. This anthropomorphism taints the analysis and discussions on the adaptation of international humanitarian law (IHL) by excluding relevant technologies from the scope of discussions. Shifting from LAWS to a network-centric sociotechnical systems perspective allows to remedy the under inclusiveness of the LAWS perspective by shifting away from the salient features of LAWS, in favour of a focus on the interactions with, and influence that the technology has on human decision-making in warfare. By criticizing the relevance of the technological focus of the current diplomatic process, the paper argues that the network-centric perspective is not only more accurate, but also more helpful and practical in adapting IHL to the armed conflicts of the twenty-first century. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Amidst fears over artificial intelligence 'arms races', much of the international debate on governing military uses of AI is still focused on preventing the use of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS). Yet 'killer robots' hardly exhaust the potentially problematic capabilities that innovation in military AI (MAI) is set to unlock. Governance initiatives narrowly focused on preserving 'meaningful human control' over LAWS therefore risk being bypassed by the technological state-of-the-art. This paper departs from the question: how can we formulate 'innovation-proof governance' approaches that are resilient or adaptive to future developments in military AI? I develop a typology for the ways in which MAI innovation can disrupt existing international legal frameworks. This includes 'direct' disruption – as new types of MAI capabilities elude categorization under existing regimes – as well as 'indirect' disruption, where new capabilities shift the risk landscape of military AI, or change the incentives or values of the states developing them. After discussing two potential objections to 'innovation-proof governance', I explore the advantages and shortcomings of three possible approaches to innovation-proof governance for military AI. While no definitive blueprint is offered, I suggest key considerations for governance strategies that seek to ensure that military AI remains lawful, ethical, stabilizing, and safe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The military conflict within India's borders whose origins are in the marginalisation of tribal peoples involves the government forces and the Naxalite rebels. This conflict has become more intense in the last decade with land being acquired to enable corporations to mine resources and the lack of redress for the Adivasi, who are the indigenous people who inhabit these territories. The alienation of the rural communities tribes from the north eastern states, which are located on the 'red corridor' is because the government has failed to implement protection for Scheduled Tribes who carry a protected status in the Indian constitution. The Naxalite movement has channelled in a violent struggle which has led to an emergency declared under Article 355, and there has been an incremental increase in the rate of fatalities. The failure of public interest litigation and the enforcement of the Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA) means that the domestic remedies for empowerment are not successful. The breach of human rights has to be assessed against the insurgency of the Naxalite guerillas and the Geneva Conventions that are applicable under the Non International Armed Conflict (NIAC). This paper will assess the rural origins of the conflict, environmental damage and the litigation by the Adivasi communities before addressing the rules under which the protections are available under the international humanitarian law. This will argue for the strict implementation of the Geneva Conventions and for NIAC to be liable for intervention as an International Armed Conflict (IAC). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]