No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 November 2010
International humanitarian law does not deal directly with the right to information, but it is useful to highlight some of the law's features in considering people's right to information in wartime.
The right to indispensable items
International law stipulates that civilians have a right to items indispensable to their survival. This entails an obligation for the parties to the conflict, both in enemy territory occupied by them and in their own territory, to allow international action to provide these items if they themselves are unable to do so.
Text based on a paper prepared for the symposium organized by the Fondation Hirondelle (Geneva, 3 and 4 July 1998) and entitled “L'intervention d'un média de paix dans un pays étranger: quelle légitimité?”. The Fondation Hirondelle is a non-governmental organization founded by Swiss journalists in 1995. Its aim is to provide impartial and independent information to people deprived of this by war or natural disasters.
1 Art. 54 and Art. 69ff. (for occupied territories) of the Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of international armed conflicts (Protocol I); Art. 14 of the Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the protection of victims of non-international armed conflicts (Protocol II). See also the commentaries on these articles: Sandoz, Yves, Swinarski, Christophe and Zimmerman, Bruno (eds.), Commentaries on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, ICRC and Martinus Nijhoff, Geneva, 1987.Google Scholar
2 Art. 70 of Protocol I and Commentary, op.cit. (note 1).
3 Art. 1 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Art. 1 of Protocol I; see also Luigi Condorelli and Laurence Boisson de Chazournes, “Quelques remarques à propos de l'obligation des États ‘de respecter et faire respecter le droit international humanitaire en toutes circonstances’”, in Swinarski, Christophe (ed.), Studies and essays on international humanitarian law and Red Cross principles in honour of Jean Pictet, ICRC/Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Geneva/The Hague, 1984, pp. 17–35.Google Scholar
4 Harroff-Tavel, Marion, “Promoting norms to limit violence in crisis situations: challenges, strategies and alliances”, IRRC, March 1998, No. 322, pp. 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 See, in particular, Grossman, Dave, On killing: the psychological cost of learning to kill in war and society, Little Brown, Boston, 1995.Google Scholar
6 In this connection see the proceedings of the 22nd Round Table of San Remo, International Institute of Humanitarian Law, 1997: “Impact of humanitarian assistance and of the mass media on the evolution of conflict situations”, to be published.
7 The Principles and their definitions were adopted by Resolution VIII of the 20th International Conference of the Red Cross(Vienna, 1965) Google Scholar . See the Conference Report and IRRC, No. 56, November 1965, p. 573.
8 Gasser, Hans-Peter, “The protection of journalists engaged in dangerous professional missions”, IRRC, January-February 1983, No. 232, p. 3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar ff., and Alain Modoux, “International humanitarian law and the journalist's mission”, ibid., p. 19 ff.
9 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, Resolution 4: “Principles and action in international humanitarian assistance and protection”,IRRC,January-February 1996, No. 310, p. 69 Google Scholar ; Council of Delegates, Resolution 3: “Future of the Movement: report of the Policy and Planning Advisory Commission established by Resolution 1/1993”, ibid., p. 142.
10 At present 20 States.
11 See note 6.