The law regulating the use of force at sea has long been due fora reevaluation in the light of developments in methods and means of warfare at sea and the fact that major changes have taken place in other branches of international law of direct relevance to this issue. This need was reflected in Resolution VII of the 25th International Conference of the Red Cross, which noted that “some areas of international humanitarian law relating to sea warfare are in need of reaffirmation and clarification on the basis of existing fundamental principles of international humanitarian law” and therefore appealed to “governments to co-ordinate their efforts in appropriate fora in order to review the necessity and the possibility of updating the relevant texts of international humanitarian law relating to sea warfare”.

El derecho internacional humanitario es considerado cada vez más como parte del derecho de los derechos humanos aplicable en los conflictos armados. Se puede seguir el rastro de esta tendencia hasta la Conferencia Internacional de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, celebrada en Teherán en 1968, que no solo impulsó el desarrollo del derecho humanitario en sí mismo, sino que marcó el inicio de un mayor uso del derecho humanitario por las Naciones Unidas al examinar la situación de los derechos humanos en determinados países o en el marco de sus estudios temáticos. La mayor conciencia de la importancia del derecho humanitario para la protección de las personas en los conflictos armados, junto con la creciente referenda a los derechos humanos en los asuntos internacionales, hace que las dos ramas del derecho tengan ahora mucha más relevancia internacional y que tanto las organizaciones internacionales como las no gubernamentales recurran a ambas con regularidad.

Sin embargo, dado que el derecho de los derechos humanos y el derecho humanitario tienen orígenes históricos completamente diferentes, su codificación ha seguido hasta hace muy poco caminos completamente distintos. Este documento tiene por objeto examinar la ‘filosofía’ de estas dos ramas del derecho a la luz de sus orígenes; cómo coinciden, con todo, en muchos aspectos esenciales; de qué manera han influido una en la otra últimamente y, por último, cómo sus similitudes y diferencias podrían determinar su uso en el futuro.

The International Review of the Red Cross is pleased to publish this essay by Professor Vangah Francis Wodie on the perception of humanitarian law by African states, and their contribution to this law's development in view of the problems confronting them. The essay reflects the personal views of the author, who gives special attention to the legal and humanitarian problems facing many states as a result of the influx of refugees and the use of mercenaries in some conflicts.

The implementation of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts must be considered in the light of three basic problems.

First, in time of peace no one wants to think about the kind of situation where this body of law is put into practice. Nor is it easy to foster enthusiasm for legal rules which are beyond people's personal experience. But unless certain efforts are made and steps taken in peacetime, it cannot be expected that these rules will be implemented in time of crisis or war.

Transitional justice aims at once to restore victims' dignity, build confidence between warring groups and foster the institutional changes needed to bring about a new relationship within the population, in order to usher in the rule of law without endorsing practices that amount to total or partial impunity. In situations of post-conflict, however, governments are also faced with other pressing needs, such as disarming fighting forces, improving civilian security, compensating victims and relaunching the economy of a society in ruins. This article explores the relationship between these needs and transitional justice mechanisms, and critically evaluates their influence on the forms justice has taken in post-conflict situations.

The International Fact-Finding Commission mentioned by Article 90 of Additional Protocol I is the only new measure introduced by the Diplomatic Conference of 1914-1911 intended to strengthen implementation of international humanitarian law. (The word ‘humanitarian’ was added to the title by the Commission itself, in order to better express the Commission's limited jurisdiction.) The Commission was established and its rules of procedure were adopted, but never since 1977 has any party to an armed conflict or any other State ever asked the Commission to exercise its activity in a concrete situation. The author (a member of the Commission) examines the reasons of this apparent failure and suggests new ways of understanding Article 90. He has no doubts about the Commission's usefulness, and he calls upon States and the other members of the international community – in particular the United Nations – to accept the Commission as a tool for strengthening respect for international humanitarian law.

Le droit international humanitaire est de plus en plus percu comme faisant partie du droit des droits de l'homme applicable dans les conflits armés. Cette évolution a commencé à se dessiner lors de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur les droits de l'homme qui s'est tenue à Téhéran en 19681: non seulement le développement du droit international humanitaire y fut encouragé, mais on vit se dégager une tendance consistant, pour les Nations Unies, à faire de plus en plus usage du droit humanitaire lorsqu'elles examinent la situation des droits de l'homme dans certains pays ou lorsqu'elles étudient certains grands thèmes. Grâce à une conscience plus aigue de 1'importance du droit humanitaire pour la protection des personnes en période de conflit armé, d'une part, et grâce à l'utilisation croissante du droit des droits de l'homme dans les affaires internationales, d'autre part, ces deux branches du droit se voient conférer un poids bien plus grand sur le plan international; les organisations, tant internationales que non gouvernementales, sont ainsi amenées à les utiliser ensemble régulièrement pour appuyer leur action.

Source de vie et de bienfaits, symbole de fécondité et de pureté, l'eau est aussi porteuse de craintes, de risques et de dangers et elle est objet de convoitises et de conflits. Ses multiples fonctions, aussi nécessaires les unes que les autres, font d'elle une ressource vitale dont l'homme a toujours essayé de réglementer l'usage et la gestion. Mais contrairement au droit applicable en temps de paix, comme en témoignent les us et coutumes des sociétés les plus anciennes ou encore les instruments juridiques internes et internationaux des temps modernes, le droit des conflits armés n'a consacré à l'eau — expressément et tardivement — que certaines dispositions. Cela est moins un reproche qu'un constat et pourrait s'expliquer par le fait que l'eau est indispensable en toutes circonstances. Abstraction faite des conséquences des catastrophes naturelles où l'eau peut être menaçante et menacée, certaines activités poursuivies par l'homme peuvent engendrer des effets néfastes et dommageables pour l'environnement et les moyens de survie des populations, dont l'eau est l'élément de base. Il suffit d'évoquer les effets de la pollution ou des conflits armés. L'expérience des guerres contemporaines nous apprend, hélas!, que la population civile et les biens de caractère civil sont exposés aux opérations militaires et que, dans certains cas, la soif peut se révéler plus meurtrière que les armes. Seul le respect des règies universellement admises permettra d'y remédier, et nous insisterons, dans les développements qui suivent, sur les dispositions pertinentes du droit humanitaire applicables à la protection de l'eau en temps de guerre (I). Ecartant d'emblée certaines considérations relevant du jus ad bellum (l'eau, source de conflits) ou se rapportant à des situations «hydro-conflictuelles», nous aborderons quelques aspects pratiques en soulignant le rôle du CICR et des autres composantes du Mouvement international de la Croix-Rouge et du Croissant-Rouge (II) avant de formuler quelques remarques d'ensemble (III).

Siege warfare and its devastating humanitarian consequences have been one of the defining features of contemporary armed conflicts. While the most apparent restriction of siege warfare appears to be provided by the prohibition against starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare, the prevailing restrictive interpretation of this prohibition has left civilians remaining in a besieged area unprotected from the hardships they endure. This article demonstrates that shifting the focus from the prohibition against starvation to the rules regulating humanitarian relief operations does not seem helpful due to the ambiguities regarding the requirement of consent and the right of control of the besieging party. In remedying this protection gap, this article examines whether and how the principle of proportionality applies in the context of a siege. After analyzing whether the encirclement and isolation aspect of a siege can be considered an attack in the sense of Article 49(1) of Additional Protocol I (AP I), to which the proportionality principle applies, the article investigates how this principle operates in the context of a siege. It will be demonstrated that Article 57(2)(b) of AP I requires that the proportionality of a siege must be continuously monitored.

Every day across the world, as people assemble, demonstrate and protest, their pictures, their messages, tweets and other personal information are amassed without adequate justification. Arguing that they do so in order to protect assemblies, governments deploy a wide array of measures, including facial recognition, fake mobile towers and internet shutdowns. These measures are primarily analyzed as interferences with the right to privacy and freedom of expression, but it is argued here that protest and other assembly surveillance should also be understood as an infringement of freedom of assembly. This is necessary not only to preserve the distinct nature of freedom of assembly that protects collective action, but also to allow for better regulation of surveillance and interference with internet communications during assemblies.

In the post-9/11 era, the label “asymmetric wars” has often been used to question the relevance of certain aspects of international humanitarian law (IHL); to push for redefining the combatant/civilian distinction; and to try to reverse accepted norms such as the bans on torture and assassination. In this piece, we focused on legal and policy discussions in the United States and Israel because they better illustrate the dynamics of State-led “norm entrepreneurship”, or the attempt to propose opposing or modified norms as a revision of IHL. We argue that although these developments are to be taken seriously, they have not weakened the normative power of IHL or made it passé. On the contrary, they have made it more relevant than ever. IHL is not just a complex (and increasingly sophisticated) branch of law detached from reality. Rather, it is the embodiment of widely shared principles of morality and ethics, and stands as a normative “guardian” against processes of moral disengagement that make torture and the acceptance of civilian deaths more palatable.

This article summarizes a country study on Iraq conducted by the Humanitarian Agenda: 2015 project of the Feinstein International Center, Tufts University, between October 2006 and May 2007.* Based on a sample survey of perceptions of humanitarian action among Iraqis at the community level and among humanitarian agencies in the region, the study focuses on what Iraqis and aid workers believe to be true about the way in which the humanitarian apparatus has functioned or malfunctioned in Iraq, and why. Its findings confirm both the strength of the humanitarian ethos in Iraq and the operational value of principled humanitarianism, but call attention to significant gaps at ground level between ethos and practice.

This opinion note explores some aspects of the relationship between humanitarian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and extractive industries. Médecins sans Frontières (Doctors without Borders, MSF) has endorsed a policy of non-engagement with the corporate sector of the extractive industries, particularly when it comes to financial donations. This is coherent with MSF being first and foremost a medical organisation, and one that adheres to the humanitarian principles of independence and neutrality. For humanitarian actors, the prospect of future environmental disasters and environmental conflicts calls for the anticipation of novel encounters, not only with environmental organisations but also with the extractive sector. Unlike environmental organisations, extractive industries are prone to generating or perpetuating different forms of violence, often putting extractive companies on a par with the parties to armed conflicts. In situations where a dialogue with extractive companies would be needed to optimise care and access to victims, humanitarian organisations should carefully weigh pragmatic considerations against the risk of being co-opted as medical providers of mitigation measures.

Dr Morris Tidball-Binz is a forensic doctor who joined the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) in 2004 and has since worked for the organization in numerous contexts, helping to develop its novel forensic capacity. Having begun his career with forensic and human rights organizations, he helped pioneer in his native South America the application of forensic science to human rights investigations, particularly the search for the disappeared. He helped create the ICRC's Forensic Unit, of which he was the first Director until early 2017; he then headed the forensic operation for the Humanitarian Project Plan. He is currently the Forensic Manager for the ICRC's new Missing Persons Project. He spoke with the Review to share his insights on the development of humanitarian forensic action and its role in protecting the dead and clarifying the fate of missing persons.

Dans son livre L'infirmière à travers les âges, L. R. Seymer raconte qu'au temps jadis, les soins infirmiers étaient confiés à des esclaves. Lorsque les soins n'aboutissaient pas à la guérison, le malheureux infirmier mourait avec son maître et comme il y avait beaucoup d'esclaves et peu de maîtres, cela ne marquait pas.

1. Los Principios Rectores expuestos a continuatión contemplan las necesidades específicas de los desplazados internos de todo el mundo. Definen los derechos y garantías pertinentes para la protectión de las personas contra el desplazamiento forzado y para su protectión y asistencia durante el desplazamiento y durante el retorno o el reasentamiento y la reintegración.

In its circular No. 478 of 15 April 1970, the International Committee of the Red Cross had the honour to inform you of its work since the XXIst International Conference of the Red Cross with a view to the reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts, consistent with several resolutions adopted by that conference.