Provisions of Geneva Conventions, 1949: A Critical Analysis from the viewpoints of Implementation of IHL

Abstract

There has been, is, and always will be war. However, warfare ought to be humanitarian. There are boundaries to conflict, and it may be humanitarian. IHL has many rules covering, among other things, the protection of the population affected by conflict and the means and techniques of battle, with the exception of a few ambiguous situations. IHL implementation, though, has proven to be very difficult. The face of warfare underwent significant change in the past century. As a result, IHL's reach grew and continues to grow. Monstrous effects result from war, and most of the time, IHL norms are broken carelessly. IHL enforcement, however, has proven to be difficult, and it appears to be only partially implemented. While those who violate the rules on the losing side might be prosecuted, those who violate the rules on the winning side might not. Therefore, applying IHL reflects the principle of power. It is more difficult to apply IHL in non-international armed conflicts than in international armed conflicts. When a particular circumstance cannot be brought inside the purview of IHL, a legal vacuum may occasionally result. Furthermore, the IHL regime's culture of impunity is sustained by the parties' lack of concern for one another. Numerous criminals are still at large. The belligerents' inconsiderate disregard for IHL norms suggests that the entire system is inept.