The structure and status of the parties involved is different. The distinction between international and non-international armed conflict is thus based on two factors:
Second, at least one side to the conflict is an organized armed group. First, there must be ‘protracted armed violence’ in the sense that a certain threshold of armed violence has been reached in terms of intensity. In contrast, for a non-international armed conflict to exist, two cumulative criteria must be fulfilled. In other words, there is an international armed conflict whenever there is a resort to armed force between states, regardless of the intensity of such force. Pursuant to a widely accepted general definition of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yuogslavia, ‘an armed conflict exists whenever there is a resort to armed force between States or protracted armed violence between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within a State.’ ICTY, The Prosecutor v Dusko Tadić, Appeals Chamber, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, IT-94-1-AR72, 2 October 1995, §70. Yet, pursuant to common Article 2(2) of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, the 1949 Geneva Conventions also apply to military occupations that do not meet with armed resistance. More precisely, military occupations that do not meet with armed resistance are not considered an international armed conflict because they do not involve the resort to armed force between states. Military occupations are a particular form of international armed conflict. Such conflicts are commonly referred to as non-international armed conflicts. Instead, international humanitarian law distinguishes between international armed conflicts and armed conflicts ‘not of an international character.’ Common Article 3 of the four 1949 Geneva Conventions.
There is not a single definition of armed conflict under international humanitarian law.
0 kommentar(er)
