It implies that States recognize that their authority is contested by armed opposition groups and acknowledge that they have lost control over a part of their territory. The weakness of international mechanisms of remedies in case of human rights violations increases this risk.īesides, it is very difficult to determine with precision the moment when the use of public force that aims at defending national security turns into an internal armed conflict. Nonetheless, States are often judge and party in these contexts and national security often prevails upon the maintenance of the rule of law. This recourse to force must nevertheless respect human rights conventions, which provide fundamental guarantees from which States cannot derogate, whatever the circumstances. In situations of internal disturbances and tensions, the State is authorized to use armed force to restore public order and national security. They are in a zone of political tensions and legal grey areas, between the application of conventions relative to human rights and those relative to international humanitarian law. Such situations are characterized by riots and isolated and sporadic acts of violence (APII Art. This means that the law of armed conflict-humanitarian law-is not applicable. Situations described in international humanitarian law as “internal disturbances and tensions” are those in which the level of violence has not yet reached an intensity qualifying the situation as an armed conflict and when the armed group involved is not sufficiently organized.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |