Article

International humanitarian law, the prohibition of terrorist acts and the fight against terrorism

Hans-Peter Gasser

• Yearbook of international humanitarian law, Vol. 4 (2001), 2004, p. 329-347

English

The author considers the extent to which IHL is equipped to respond to terrorism. He argues that the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols provide established procedures for preventing and repressing terrorist actions. In the context of international armed conflict, the author explains that, while IHL treaties do not make terrorism a crime in and of itself, “all conceivable, individual acts of a terrorist nature” are defined as international crimes. For example, Additional Protocol I prohibits indiscriminate attacks directed at civilians, and the use of violence against combatants while feigning civilian status. With regard to the rules applicable to non-international armed conflict, the same norms apply. However, the author contends that states intending to combat terrorism must also comply with IHL, and that certain “fundamental and inalienable human rights” must be protected. Issues such as the status of detainees, the principle of proportionality in the use of force, and the right of humanitarian organizations like the ICRC to protect and assist victims, must be accounted for in any anti-terrorist campaign. While IHL is well developed to confront terrorism, the key issue is the respect for humanitarian commitments undertaken by states combating terrorism. [Summary by students at the University of Toronto, Faculty of Law (IHRP)]

• Yearbook of international humanitarian law
• Yearbook of international humanitarian law [Vol. 4, 2001]