Mr Bektas Ozer
Laws of Armed Conflict Coursework 2011/2012
A) Explain and critically discuss the differences in the scope and applicability of Common Article 3 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
Article 3 is applicable in case of armed conflicts that are not of an international character, but that are in the territory of one of the Contracting Parties to the 1949 conventions. It also applies to circumstances where the conflict is within the State, between the Government and the rebel forces or between the rebel forces themselves. Furthermore article 3 compromises an international minimum protection to persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, and detention.
Humane and non-discriminatory treatments are two essential protections presented under this article. It excludes certain acts as against protected person, which are listed in this article. Common article 3 adopts greater significance than Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, 1949 for the reasons that the Geneva Conventions 1949 have been approved by large number of States and also that article 3 has proven to be declaratory of customary international law on this point, as a Similar view was expressed by the International Court of Justice in its judgment in the case of Nicaragua vs. The United States of America1. The court held that Article 3, as a part of customary law constituted a ‘minimum yard stick’ applicable to all armed conflicts. However, the customary law character of Article 3 has been questioned by publicists. Theodor Meron, while agreeing that “Article 3 may well express the quintessence of humanitarian rules found in other substantive provisions of the Geneva Conventions” is not sure that the rules of Article 3 have necessarily attained the character of customary rules of international law. Also, this article is applicable to the situation of non-international armed conflicts in
A) Explain and critically discuss the differences in the scope and applicability of Common Article 3 to the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
Article 3 is applicable in case of armed conflicts that are not of an international character, but that are in the territory of one of the Contracting Parties to the 1949 conventions. It also applies to circumstances where the conflict is within the State, between the Government and the rebel forces or between the rebel forces themselves. Furthermore article 3 compromises an international minimum protection to persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed ' hors de combat ' by sickness, wounds, and detention.
Humane and non-discriminatory treatments are two essential protections presented under this article. It excludes certain acts as against protected person, which are listed in this article. Common article 3 adopts greater significance than Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, 1949 for the reasons that the Geneva Conventions 1949 have been approved by large number of States and also that article 3 has proven to be declaratory of customary international law on this point, as a Similar view was expressed by the International Court of Justice in its judgment in the case of Nicaragua vs. The United States of America1. The court held that Article 3, as a part of customary law constituted a ‘minimum yard stick’ applicable to all armed conflicts. However, the customary law character of Article 3 has been questioned by publicists. Theodor Meron, while agreeing that “Article 3 may well express the quintessence of humanitarian rules found in other substantive provisions of the Geneva Conventions” is not sure that the rules of Article 3 have necessarily attained the character of customary rules of international law. Also, this article is applicable to the situation of non-international armed conflicts in
Bibliography: Adam Roberts and Richard Guelff, 2nd edition Geneva Conventions of 12 August, 1949: Commentary The Handbook of Humanitarian Armed Conflicts, (1995) Websites Journals American Journal of International Law, vol.93 (1999) American Journal of International Law, vol.82 (1988) European Journal of International Law, vol.9 (1998) Fordham International Law Journal, vol.22 (1998) Yale Law Journal of International Law, vol.17, (1992)