Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-03T20:03:16.181Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The minimum humanitarian rules applicable in periods of internal tension and strife

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2010

Djamchid Momtaz
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Many States have in the course of their history faced internal tension and strife, sometimes so serious as to threaten their fundamental interests. These situations, characterized as they are by acts of revolt and violence committed by more or less organized groups fighting either the authorities or amongst themselves, are distinct from those termed non-international armed conflicts, in which the violence is more intense. In order to bring these internal confrontations to an end and restore order, the authorities frequently make massive use of police force or even the armed forces. The inevitable result is a weakening of the rule of law, marked by serious, large-scale human rights violations causing widespread suffering among the population.

Type
50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Human rights and international humanitarian law
Information
International Review of the Red Cross (1961 - 1997) , Volume 38 , Special Issue 324: 1948—1998 Human rights and international humanitarian law , September 1998 , pp. 455 - 462
Copyright
Copyright © International Committee of the Red Cross 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its forty-eighth session, 6 May-26 July 1996. UN document A/51/10, p. 137.

2 Nicole Questiaux, “Study of the implications for human rights of recent developments concerning situations known as states of siege or emergency”, UN doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1982/15, 27 July 1982, p. 8.

3 “Report of the international workshop on minimum humanitarian standards” (Cape Town, South Africa, 27–29 September 1996), UN doc. E/CN.4/1997/77/Add.l, 28 January 1997.

4 According to Article 4, paragraph 3 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights, the States exercising the right of derogation must, through the agency of the UN Secretary-General, immediately inform the other States Parties of the provisions from which they have departed, and the reasons for this departure. Similarly, paragraph 3 of Article 15 of the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms stipulates that the States Parties who exercise this right must keep the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe fully informed of the measures taken and grounds for taking them.

5 See resolution 1997/21, paragraph 3, of 11 April 1997 of the Human Rights Commission.

6 Article 4 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights, Article 15 of the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and Article 27 of the American Convention on human rights.

7 Meron, Theodor, Human Rights in internal strife: their international protection, Grotius Publications, Cambridge, 1987, p. 52 Google Scholar , and Gasser, Hans-Peter, “A measure of humanity in internal disturbances and tensions: proposal for a Code of Conduct”, IRRC, No. 262, January-February 1988, p. 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 The Corfu Channel case (United Kingdom v. Albania), I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 22.

9 Case concerning the Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain), I.C.J. Reports 1970, p. 32.

10 Ibid.

11 Supra (note 1), Article 33, paragraph 2.

12 Marks, Stephen P., “The principles and norms of human rights applicable in emergency situations”, in Vasak, Karel (ed.), The international dimensions of human rights, UNESCO, Paris, 1978, p. 218.Google Scholar

13 UN General Assembly resolution 43/173 of 9 December 1988. See Koojmans, Peter H., “In the shadowland between civil war and civil strife: some reflections on the standard-setting process in humanitarian law of armed conflict”, in Delissen, Astrid J.M. and Tanja, Gerard J. (Eds.), Humanitarian law of armed conflict — challenges ahead, Essays in honour of Frits Kalshoven, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London, p. 239.Google Scholar

14 Geneva Convention for the amelioration of the condition of the wounded and sick in armed forces in the field, Commentary published under the direction of Jean S. Pictet, ICRC, Geneva, 1952, pp. 56 and 61.

15 Harroff-Tavel, Marion, “Action taken by the International Committee of the Red Cross in situations of internal violence”, IRRC, No. 294, May-June 1993, pp. 195–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

16 Case concerning military and paramilitary activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), I.C.J. Reports 1986, p. 114, para. 220.

17 Meron, Theodor, “Towards a humanitarian declaration on internal strife”, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 78, 1984, pp. 859–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 Gasser, Hans-Peter, “Humanitarian standards for internal strife”, IRRC, No. 294, May-June 1993, p. 223.Google Scholar

19 Text published by the IRRC, No. 282, May-June 1991, pp. 330–336, and by the American Journal of International Law, Vol. 85, 1991, pp. 375–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Supra (note 7).

21 Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, Moscow Declaration of 3 October 1991, International Legal Materials, Vol. 30, 1991, p. 1670 ff.

22 Observations of Switzerland, Report of the Sub-Commission on prevention of discrimination and protection of minorities, UN doc. E/CN.4/1997/77/Add. 1, 28 January 1997, p. 2.

23 Human Rights Commission, resolution 1997/21, 11 April 1997.