Part II of the Protocol, on the other hand, which concerns “Wounded, sick and shipwrecked,” is Geneva Law-the mainstay of international humanitarian law (IHL), where that term is correctly delineated.

Placed in Part IV of the Protocol entitled “Civilian population,” this is the second of the two parts in the Protocol that are devoted to Hague Law. Thus, it is important to situate the Article 49 definition in its context. This omission is particularly serious in the context of a non-international armed conflict, where the geographical scope of hostilities is tightly circumscribed. For it fails to consider the notion of an “attack” in Geneva Law (which protects persons and objects in the power of the enemy), which applies more broadly than does the Hague Law regulation of the conduct of hostilities. One might thus be tempted to end an inquiry of the law there.īut in this post, we detail why such an approach would be mistaken.

Indeed, as is well known, the notion of “attacks” is explicitly defined in Article 49 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I as “acts of violence against the adversary, whether in offence or in defence.” A seemingly broad definition, it is certainly clear and concise.

By Christof Heyns, Stuart Casey-Maslen, Thomas ProbertĪs in any branch of international law, examining the meaning of a law of armed conflict (LOAC) term, and its incorporation in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, should look first to the treaties-and “attack” is no different.

Definition of an armed conflict