At issue in a current legal dispute between the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the United States Department of Defense (DoD) is the faithful application of the Geneva Conventions. The ACLU has filed several requests under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act requesting the release of records relating to the abuse of individuals detained by the U.S. overseas. The U.S. Government has duly released some of the requested documents, but is currently opposing a specific request relating to photographs and videotapes relating to the abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, arguing that their relase would violate provisions of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions protecting the dignity of detainees.

On April 7, Ibrahim al-Jaafari was appointed Prime Minister of Iraq. The appointment was made by the new Iraqi President, Jalal Talabani, whose election by the 275 members of the Iraqi national assembly came only the day before. The assumption of power by both men puts an end to negotiations between representatives from Iraq's Sunni, Shia and Kurdish communities that have dragged on since the January 30th election. This information page follows the evolution of the new government as it moves towards a constitutional referendum and a new round of parliamentary elections later this year.

On 2 March 2004, bomb attacks on worshippers at Shiite Muslim shrines in Baghdad and the holy city of Karbala killed at least 125 civilians. Witnesses state that the attack at the Kazimiya Shrine in Baghdad was carried out by three or four suicide attackers who set off explosives in and around the shrine. It is still unclear if the casualties in Karbala were the work of suicide attackers or pre-set explosives. Bomb attacks against civilians have occurred previously in Iraq and have targeted civilians, embassy staff, humanitarian aid workers, and journalists. For instance, on 29 August 2003, a car bomb attack on the Imam Ali Mosque in the Iraqi city of Najaf killed at least 80 civilians and wounded many more. (See news on right as well as feature piece on IHL implications of suicide attacks.) Such attacks violate the fundamental rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) and are punishable as war crimes.

On 8 November 2004, U.S. Marines launched a full-scale offensive to take control of the city of Falluja. The assault on Falluja raises issues for international humanitarian law (“IHL”) including rules applicable during siege warfare, the rules of IHL applicable when conducting military operations in urban warfare, and rules concerning humanitarian access.

Information Page

On February 17, the Iraqi electoral commission certified the results of the January elections. The United Iraqi Alliance, a predominately Shia coalition of representatives, emerged with just under half the vote and a narrow majority of the available seats in the new Iraqi parliament. This information page briefly examines the results of the election as Iraq moves towards the convening of the National Assembly and the writing of a draft constitution.

(14 April 2003) The situation of general chaos (see related news) resulting from the fall of Baghdad and other major cities in Iraq has demonstrated the importance of having a clear set of obligations for the maintenance of law and order and the re-establishment of public services in the present circumstances. The Fourth Geneva Convention and the Hague Regulations regulate the situation of belligerent occupation. They set forth a series of duties and obligations for the parties involved from Coalition forces to relief agencies and the Iraqi population itself. Their purpose is to ensure minimal protection of the civilian population and favor the stabilization of the security and living conditions in the territory under the control of invading forces. This featured analysis is the first in a series dedicated to the laws of occupation in Iraq. It focuses on the conditions for the application of the rules of IHL pertaining to occupation and the basic responsibilities for the maintenance of law and order. Forthcoming features will address other aspects of military occupation such as humanitarian relief, the role and responsibilities of humanitarian organizations, the administration of justice and other essential services.

(22 April 2003) Events in Iraq have shown the importance of restoring essential public services and allowing emergency relief operations to reach the Iraqi population. This featured analysis reviews the existing rules of IHL pertaining to the responsibility of the Occupying Powers to restore and maintain public services and addresses the unique role of UN humanitarian agencies and NGOs in occupied territory.

(6 April 2003) Over the past week, the Iraqi government has announced on several occasions its intent to use suicide attacks against US and British forces as a method of warfare. It has referred to these operations as a “kind of martyrdom.” As of 5 April, several of these operations against Coalition Forces have taken place where attackers posing as civilians have targeted US and British soldiers at checkpoints. Coalition Forces have referred to these attacks as acts of terrorism and have imposed heightened security measures on contacts with the civilian population, increasing the risks of error at checkpoints that may carry dramatic consequences for the population (see latest news ). This features analysis clarifies the legal aspects of suicide attacks under IHL and underlines the importance of the strict adherence to the law in the conduct of such attacks to ensure the protection of civilians.

(27 March 2003) In order to ensure the protection of civilians, one must be able to distinguish combatants from the civilian population. Only enemy combatants and other elements of the enemy’s military capability may be the target of attacks whereas civilians are, in principle, not allowed to take part in hostilities. Current developments on the battlefield in Iraq seem to blur the distinction between combatants and civilians: some combatants appear to wear civilian outfits in combat while groups of civilians take up arms against invading forces, civilians are allegedly being used as human shields while others are being detained as prisoners by the invading forces. This featured analysis reviews the applicable rules of IHL, clarifies some of these distinctions and recalls the main obligations of the parties in these circumstances.

(25 March 2003) In the course of a military campaign, combatants that surrender, are captured, or otherwise have fallen into the power of the enemy, may benefit from a specific protection regime granted by the Third Geneva Convention. This featured analysis reviews the conditions of the prisoner of war (POW) protection regime, the rights and treatment of POWs, the conditions for their repatriation, and underlines some of the key issues arising in the current conflict in Iraq. The issue of POW rights, and the legal duties of both Iraq and the U.S. in their treatment of POWs, has become increasingly relevant in the current conflict. Officials from both sides of the conflict have recently cited IHL as supporting their position.

(6 April 2003) New technologies have had a major impact on how modern warfare is conducted, particularly aerial attacks and bombardments that rely extensively on new technologies to identify and destroy their targets. Precision –guided munitions, new intelligence gathering devices, remote control drones and other high-tech tools have increased the capacity of their possessors to target military assets and limit collateral damage. However, such technologies have also blurred the line of accountability in the selection of targets and may create a sense of infallibility in the attacking party. Recent events in Iraq where civilians were have been killed, or where bombs have landed in residential areas, demonstrate the need to recall that even the use of the most sophisticated technology carries major risks for the civilian population. The diligence from the parties to conflict expected under IHL in their selection of targets increases with the capacity of these parties to discriminate between military and civilian assets. This featured analysis reviews some of the key provisions in IHL on targeting and clarifies some of its concepts in light of the situation in Iraq.

(26 March 2003) Ensuring humanitarian access to the civilian population is a key obligation under the Geneva Conventions and one of the most important duties of the coalition forces at this juncture. This featured analysis reviews the legal basis of the obligation to ensure humanitarian access and presents a series of recommendations for its proper implementation.

(21 March 2003) International Humanitarian Law (IHL) holds as its most fundamental principle that the parties to a conflict do not have an unlimited choice of means or methods of warfare. The use of force has to be applied as to minimize civilian casualties, remain proportionate to a concrete and direct military advantage, and avoid superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.

(21 March 2003) International Humanitarian Law was first developed at a time when international law regarded the use of force as a legitimate means of engaging in international relations. States had the right, under a set of legal conditions called jus ad bellum, to use military force against other states. When such states engaged in an armed conflict, their behavior was subject to specific rules (jus in bello) designed to regulate the conduct of hostilities.

(22 March 2003) The laws of war which set out the obligations, responsibilities and protections that will apply to belligerents are set out by the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the pursuant Protocols of 1977, as well as customary international law. Neither US or Iraq has ratified Protocol 1 of the 1949 Conventions, which expands and reaffirms the protection of civilians in armed conflict and constraints on the means and methods of warfare. However, the U.S. is a signatory to Protocol I, and many aspects of Protocol I have been recognized as part of customary international law, applicable to all State parties to armed conflict.

Professor Sir Adam Roberts

Can a military occupation – and all the responsibilities of an occupying power as laid down in the laws of war – end at a single moment in time, and without the actual departure of the foreign military forces involved? This is the core question posed by the planned twin events of 28 June 2004 in Iraq: (1) the assumption of full authority by the sovereign Interim Government of Iraq, and (2) the proclaimed end of the US-led occupation of Iraq that had begun during the war of March-April 2003.