Demands for Compensation

In the aftermath of conflict, demands for compensation reverberate, seeking to mend the indelible scars left by the brutality of war.

Implementation and Enforcement

The implementation of IHL refers to the process of giving effect to the international obligations at the national level. States can implement IHL through the adoption of domestic legislation, and by instructing military commanders of the armed forces, as well as disseminating IHL among the general public.

The enforcement of IHL refers to the acts which ensure that the laws of armed conflict are respected. e.g. IHL can be enforced through measures of the UN Security Council passed under Chapter Seven of the UN Charter, through judgements of the International Court of Justice, through the payment of reparations or even criminal prosecutions.

Every legal system needs both implementation and enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance with the law and counteract violations. IHL requires states to implement and enforce the rules that govern armed conflict. The crucial law in this regard is Common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions (states that the high contrasting parties have a duty to "respect and ensure respect for IHL").

This ruling could imply 2 duties for states that they must comply...

1. a negative duty to refrain from any violations of IHL

2. a passive duty to ensure the implementation/ application of IHL

Is IHL effectively Implemented or Enforced?

There is a commonly skewed notion that IHL no longer serves its purpose. The media, for obvious reasons, tend to focus purely on the violations of IHL.

There are 2 key characteristics of implementation and enforcement of IHL that may lead to certain weaknesses in the current IHL system:

1. The absence of a central body in charge of the enforcement e.g. no permanent IHL court.

2. International law has to attempt to combine 2 opposing interests.

However it should be noted that this does not negate the effectiveness of IHL, and instead highlights room for further advancements in the current system of governance.

Demands for Compensation

Article 91 of Additional Protocol I says that a state which violates the provisions of the Geneva Conventions or of Additional Protocol I shall be liable to pay compensation. (There is no explicit mention of rights of individuals to seek damages.) The UNSC can further enforce IHL laws.

The "Mothers of Srebrenica" successfully received reparations from the Dutch government before the district court in the Hague in 2014. Because individual cases were unsuccessful, victims could submit complaints to their own government, which then in turn included such claims as part of a political settlement with the opposing party.

One bilateral and rather confrontational form of enforcing the law of armed conflict is when the opposing party takes lawful counter-measures during armed conflict, such as the resortment to lawful reprisals. There could also be peaceful settlement e.g. negotiation, inquiry, mediation, and conciliation.

The UNSC has the power to employ coercive measures in case of a threat to peace or breach of peace under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.