law of armed conflict international human rights law protection

The conclusion is inevitable: there is a need for international rules which limit the effects of war on people and property, and which protect certain particularly vulnerable groups of persons. Armed conflicts are a sad reality in our contemporary world. Finally (and this is not a legal argument!), wars do in fact occur, as we all know, despite their being outlawed by the Charter of the United Nations. Chapter VII of the Charter allows member States the use of force in collective action to maintain or restore international peace and security. The Charter's prohibition of the use of force does not encompass internal armed conflicts (or civil wars).

Indeed, States retain the right to defend themselves, individually or collectively, against attacks on their independence or their territory, in response to a (legal or illegal) use of force.

The Charter has not completely outlawed the use of force. There are three answers of a legal nature to that question - and a sad conclusion: So why talk about international rules dealing with armed conflicts (or war) and their effects, if the Charter has banned recourse to force in international relations? Since 1945, war has no longer been an acceptable way to settle differences between States. The Charter of the United Nations states clearly that the threat or use of force against other States is unlawful. A look at the substance of the law: humanitarian limits on warfareġ. Why do we need international humanitarian law? From Henry Dunant to present-day international humanitarian lawģ.

Why do we need international humanitarian law?Ģ. Dr Hans-Peter Gasser, former Senior Legal Adviser at the International Committee of the Red Cross, is Editor-in-Chief of the International Revue of the Red Cross.ġ.

Law of armed conflict international human rights law protection