Proceedings of the conference on customary international humanitarian law
[Tehran] : [Majd publications], [2009?]
Are the norms of international humanitarian law really meaningful despite their constant violation ? This is the "challenge of enforcement". The attention is drawn on specific tools and procedures that have been developed and designed to ensure the respect of the rules of international law relating to the use of military force. The first type of practice is internalisation of norms, i.e. the relevant actors know the law and have a positive attitude towards it. The second type, referred to as "guardians of the public interest" or watchdogs of the application of the law of armed conflict are these institutions designed to ensure compliance with the law of armed conflict such as the Security Council, the ICRC or various NGOs. The traditional means of interstate dispute settlement also play a role as third type of procedures to ensure the respect of IHL. States are internationally responsible for violations of IHL which are attributable to them and must make full reparation of the damage sustained as consequence. The fourth type consist of international and national criminal law, and the last type are the individual remedies before national or international courts.