1. The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC)
Fundamental Principles Part 1
Intersection with Human Rights Law (HRL)
International Armed Conflict (IAC)
Frederick Michael Lorenz JD, LLM
Senior Peace Fellow, PILPG
rlorenz@pilpg.org
Public International Law & Policy Group
2. What is an
Armed
Conflict?
From Protocol 1
(International Armed
Conflict or IAC’s)
• Between armed forces and dissident
armed forces or other organized armed
groups which, under responsible
command, exercise such control over a
part of its territory as to enable them to
carry out sustained and concerted
military operations and to implement this
Protocol (emphasis supplied)
3. What is an
Armed
Conflict?
A ruling from the
ICTY Tadic Case
• ..the intensity of the conflict and the
organization of the parties to the conflict.
………distinguishing an armed conflict
from banditry, unorganized and
short-lived insurrections, or terrorist
activities, which are not subject to
international humanitarian law.
4. Lieber Code
24 April 1863
•Instructions for US Army in the
Field
•First attempt to codify the law of
war
•Professor Lieber of Columbia
Univ.
•157 Articles concerning conduct
•Article 16: Military necessity does
not admit of cruelty…..or an act of
hostility which makes a return to
the peace unnecessarily difficult
5. Human Rights
Law (HRL)
• Human Rights Law is generally
applicable to (and safeguarded by)
States.
• There is a natural tension between
the goals of human rights and
LOAC-IHL.
• LOAC-IHL might be considered the
“lex-specialis” that is applicable to
Common Article 2 conflicts.
• There is some disagreement on the
“overlap” between HRL and IHL.
• Most analysts (and the ICJ) agree
that the two realms cannot be fully
separated.
6. . IHL-LOAC Human Rights Law
● Regulates conduct of hostilities
between states (and individuals
and armed groups)
● Authorizes use of deadly force as a
first resort against enemy
personnel
● Designed to protect against
incidental casualties from lawful
attacks
● Deprivations of liberty allowed
based on presumption of hostility
● Regulates conduct of states towards
individuals within their jurisdiction
● Authorizes use of deadly force only
as a last resort
● Designed to protect the object of
state violence from excessive force
● Deprivations of liberty require
individualized determinations
7. Some Thoughts On Self Defense
Public International Law & Policy Group
● Self Defense can be viewed from the perspective of Jus Ad Bellum, the
initiation of an armed conflict by a State.
● Russia claims, without factual or legal basis, that the War in Ukraine is
defensive. In this course, you will later hear more on Crime of Aggression.
● From an individual or unit perspective, Self Defense can be considered an
inherent right.
● “Rules of Engagement” are generally based on the concept of HOSTILE ACT or
HOSTILE INTENT.
● When using force, combatants must comply with the basic principles
(including discrimination and proportionality) mentioned in the presentation
today.
8. The Common
Articles
of the 1949 Geneva
Conventions
Common Article 2
(International Armed
Conflict) IAC
Common Article 3
(Non-international
Armed Conflict) NIAC
9. International
Armed Conflict
• Uniformed Combatants fighting
under State Control.
• LOAC-IHL was initially developed to
deal with these conditions.
• When applicable, all the provisions of
the Four Geneva Conventions apply,
including the Law of Occupation.
11. Critical
Questions
• The body of IHL/LOAC has been
steadily increasing but compliance
and accountability has been in
decline for the past 20 years.
• In a time of turbulence in
international relations and increasing
levels of violence, what is the role of
international humanitarian law?
• What can be done to promote
compliance and accountability?
12. IHL and Ukraine
• An International Armed Conflict (IAC) is
between States.
• This is clearly an “international armed
conflict” in Ukraine under the rules of
international humanitarian law (IHL) despite
the claims of Putin.
• Russia has completely disregarded these
principles in conducting the war.
• The conflict is assisted by outside forces
including NATO with the support of the US.
• The real issue: what can be done in a
practical sense to end the war and limit the
destruction. That is much more important
than agonizing over the legal definitions.
