Jump to content

Protocol I

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Geneva Protocol I)
"Geneva Protocol I" redirects here. For the chemical and nuclear weapons protocol, see Geneva Protocol. For other topics, see Geneva Protocol (disambiguation).
For other uses, see Protocol 1 (disambiguation).

Geneva Conventions Protocol I
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)
TypeProtocol
Drafted20 February 1974 – 8 June 1977
Signed8 June 1977 (1977-06-08)
LocationGeneva
Effective7 December 1978 (1978-12-07)
Signatories
3 states[1]
Parties
174 states[2]
DepositarySwiss Federal Council
Languages
Full text
Geneva Convention/Protocol I at Wikisource
A map showing the state parties and signatories of Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions (1977).
  State parties (174) [note 1]
  State signatories (3)

Protocol I (also Additional Protocol I and AP I)[4] is a 1977 amendment protocol to the Geneva Conventions concerning the protection of civilian victims of international war, including "armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination, alien occupation or racist regimes".[5] In practice, Additional Protocol I updated and reaffirmed the international laws of war stipulated in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 to accommodate developments of warfare since the Second World War (1937–1945).

Summary of provisions

[edit]

Protocol I is an extensive document, containing 102 articles. The following is a basic overview of the protocol.[6] For a comprehensive listing of all provisions, consult the text[7] and the commentary.[8] In general, the protocol reaffirms the provisions of the original four Geneva Conventions. However, the following additional protections are added.

  • Article I states that the convention applies in "armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist régimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination".
  • Article 37 prohibits perfidy. It identifies four types of perfidy and differentiates ruses of war from perfidy.
  • Article 40 prohibits no quarter, including that there are no survivors, to threaten an adversary as such, or to conduct hostilities on that basis.
  • Article 42 outlaws attacks on pilots and aircrews who are parachuting from an aircraft in distress. Once they landed in territory controlled by an adverse party, they must be given an opportunity to surrender before being attacked unless it is apparent that they are engaging in a hostile act or attempting to escape. Airborne troops, or agents who are parachuting from an aircraft, whether in distress or not, are not given the protection afforded by this Article and, therefore, may be attacked during their descent.
  • Article 43 deals with the identification of Armed Forces that are Party to a conflict, and states that combatants "shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict."
  • Article 47(1) "A mercenary shall not have the right to be a combatant or a prisoner of war."
  • Articles 51 and 54 outlaw indiscriminate attacks on civilian populations, and destruction of food, water, and other materials needed for survival. Indiscriminate attacks include directly attacking civilian (non-military) targets, but also using technologies whose scope of destruction cannot be limited.[8] A total war that does not distinguish between civilian and military targets is considered a war crime.
  • Articles 56 and 53 outlaw attacks on dams, dikes, nuclear electrical-generating stations, and places of worship. The first three are "works and installations containing dangerous forces" and may be attacked only in ways that do not threaten to release the dangerous forces (i.e., it is permissible to capture them but not to destroy them).
  • Articles 76 and 77, 15 and 79 provide special protections for women, children, and civilian medical personnel, and provide measures of protection for journalists.
  • Article 77 forbids conscription of children under age 15 into the armed forces. It does allow, however, for persons under the age of 15 to participate voluntarily.[8]
  • Articles 43 and 44 clarify the military status of members of guerrilla forces. Combatant and prisoner of war status are granted to members of dissident forces when under the command of a central authority. Such combatants cannot conceal their allegiance; they must be recognizable as combatants while preparing for or during an attack.
  • Article 35 bans weapons that "cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering", as well as means of warfare that "cause widespread, long-term, and severe damage to the natural environment".
  • Article 85 states that it is a war crime to use one of the protective emblems recognized by the Geneva Conventions to deceive the opposing forces (perfidy).
  • Articles 17 and 81 authorize the ICRC, national societies, or other impartial humanitarian organizations to provide assistance to the victims of war.
  • Article 90 states that "The High Contracting Parties may at the time of signing, ratifying or acceding to the Protocol, or at any other subsequent time, declare that they recognize ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other High Contracting Party accepting the same obligation, the competence of the [International Fact-Finding] Commission to enquire into allegations by such other Party, as authorized by this Article."[9] 74 states have made such a declaration.

Ratification status

[edit]

As of August 2024, it had been ratified by 174 states.[10] The United States, Iran, and Pakistan signed it on 12 December 1977 but never ratified it. Israel, India, and Turkey have not signed the treaty.

Russia

[edit]

On 16 October 2019, President Vladimir Putin signed an executive order[11] and submitted a State Duma bill to revoke the statement accompanying Russia's ratification of the Protocol I, accepting the competence of the Article 90(2) International Fact-Finding Commission.[12][13][14] The bill was supplied with the following warning:[12][14]

Exceptional circumstances affect the interests of the Russian Federation and require urgent action. ... In the current international environment, the risks of abuse of the commission's powers for political purposes by unscrupulous states who act in bad faith have increased significantly.

Article 1(4)

[edit]

Article 1(4) says:

The situations referred to in the preceding paragraph include armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination.

The three categories have been interpreted narrowly as follows:[15]

  • "colonial domination" refers to "saltwater colonialism" of overseas colonies. It was not meant to apply to states conquering and annexing adjacent territories.
  • "alien occupation" refers to "cases where the occupied territory did not yet form part of a state at the time of occupation but was occupied by a distinct group, such as the Palestinian people".
  • "racist regimes" referred mainly to apartheid South Africa and Rhodesia. It only included those countries with institutionalized racism, but not countries where the government merely practiced racial discrimination.

Some scholars opined that this article constituted the main impediment that prevented Israel and apartheid-era South Africa from signing the agreement.[16]

The article appears to grant combatant status to non-state actors. As many non-state actors have been designated as terrorist groups (such as the Palestine Liberation Organization), the Reagan administration declared that Article 1(4) would "grant terrorists a psychological and legal victory".[17]

By contrast, an article in the International Review of the Red Cross argues that this article, in fact, strengthens the fight against terrorism, by applying the laws of war (including all its prohibitions and obligations) to national wars of liberation. The rest of the Protocol contains strict prohibitions against acts of terror (Article 13, Article 51(2) etc).[18]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^ Russia revoked their ratification of the point 2 of Article 90 on 16 October 2019 via executive order and submitted such legislation to be adopted by the State Duma.[3]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - Signatory States - Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977". ihl-databases.icrc.org. Retrieved 13 April 2022.
  2. ^ "Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - States Parties - Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977". ihl-databases.icrc.org. Retrieved 13 April 2022.
  3. ^ "Putin Pulls Russia Out of Convention on War-Crime Probes". Bloomberg. 17 October 2019.
  4. ^ Cadwalader, George Jr. (2011). "The Rules Governing the Conduct of Hostilities in Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949: A Review of Relevant United States References". Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 2011 - Volume 14. Vol. 14. pp. 133–171. doi:10.1007/978-90-6704-855-2_5. ISBN 978-90-6704-854-5.
  5. ^ Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977, ICRC; International Committee of the Red Cross
  6. ^ "A Summary of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols" (PDF). The American National Red Cross.
  7. ^ "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977". The American National Red Cross.
  8. ^ a b c "Commentary on the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions" (PDF). International Committee of the Red Cross.
  9. ^ "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977". International Committee of the Red Cross. Retrieved 22 July 2013.
  10. ^ "Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977". International Committee of the Red Cross.
  11. ^ "Указ Президента Российской Федерации от 16.10.2019 № 494" [Executive order by President of Russian Federation No. 494, 16 October 2019]. publication.pravo.gov.ru. Retrieved 10 March 2022.
  12. ^ a b "Putin Seeks to Abandon Geneva Conventions' Victim-Protection Clause". The Moscow Times. 17 October 2019.
  13. ^ "Putin Pulls Russia Out of Convention on War-Crime Probes". Bloomberg. 17 October 2019.
  14. ^ a b "Putin revokes additional protocol to Geneva Conventions related to protection of war crimes victims". The Globe and Mail. Reuters. 17 October 2019.
  15. ^ Hessbruegge, Jan Arno (2017). Human rights and personal self-defense in international law (First ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. p. 317. ISBN 9780190655020.
  16. ^ According to "A Response to Douglas J. Feith's Law in the Service of Terror -- The Strange Case of the Additional Protocol" by Waldemar A. Solf (1986), Akron Law Review vol. 20, issue 2, p. 285: "In view of the foregoing, it follows that the self determination provision in Art. 1(4) is largely symbolic and is not at all likely to present any practical problems in operations except that it automatically precludes Israel and South Africa from being parties to the Protocol, an unfortunate consequence in view of the military capability of both states in relation to their neighbors."
  17. ^ According to "Exceptional Engagement: Protocol I and a World United Against Terrorism" by Michael A. Newton (2009), Texas International Law Journal vol. 45, p 323: "The United States chose not to adopt the Protocol in the face of intensive international criticism because of its policy conclusions that the text contained overly expansive provisions resulting from politicized pressure to accord protection to terrorists who elected to conduct hostile military operations outside the established legal framework."
  18. ^ Gasser, Hans-Peter. "Prohibition of terrorist acts in international humanitarian law" (PDF). International Review of the Red Cross: 208, 210, 211.
[edit]
Wikisource has original text related to this article:
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Protocol_I&oldid=1256836708"