Special agreements as a means of enhancing compliance with IHL in non-international armed conflicts: An inquiry into the governing legal regime

Abstract

Common Article 3 to the four Geneva Conventions encourages the parties to a non-international armed conflict to bring into force international humanitarian law provisions through the conclusion of special agreements. Since armed groups are ever more frequent participants in contemporary armed conflicts, the relevance of those agreements as means to enhance compliance with IHL has grown as well. The decision-making process of special agreements recognizes that all the parties to the conflict participate in the clarification and expansion of the applicable rights and obligations in a way that is consistent with the principle of equality of belligerents. This provides incentives for armed groups to respect the IHL rules they have themselves negotiated. However, even upon the conclusion of such agreements, it remains unclear which legal regime governs them. This paper will argue that special agreements are governed by international law instead of domestic law or asui generislegal regime.

Devlet Dişi Si̇lahli Gruplarin Uluslararasi İnsancil Hukuka Uymasina Sebebi̇yet Veren Nedenler Üzeri̇nde Bi̇r İnceleme

“…Maddesi, tarafları sözleşmeyi uygulayabilmek için anlaşmalar yapmaya teşvik etmektedir. Bu anlaşmalar silahlı gruplara halihazırda mevcut olan uluslararası insancıl hukuk yükümlülüklerini anlama ve açıklığa kavuşturma fırsatı sunarken (beyan anlaşma), aynı zamanda halihazırda geçerli olan uluslararası insancıl hukuk hükümlerinin ötesine geçerek (kurucu anlaşma) tarafların yükümlülüklerini artırma potansiyeline de sahiptir (Heffes & Kotlik, 2014: 1205. Olumsuz yönüne bakacak olursak, ilk olarak uygulanabilir hukuki çerçeveye ilişkin netlik eksikliği ve ikinci olarak da devletlerin bu tür bir anlaşmanın devlet dışı silahlı gruplara meşruiyet kazandırabileceğinden korkmaları nedeniyle Ortak Madde 3 açıkça aksini belirtmesine rağmen, anlaşma yapma imkanını nadiren kullanıldıklarını gözlemleyebiliriz (Mack, 2008: 17).…”

Displacement and dispossession: redefining forced displacement and identifying when forced displacement becomes pillage under international humanitarian law

“…unilateral declarations or special agreements (Mack and Pejic 2008;Lacroix et al 2011;Jong 2015). Numerous documents created during conflict highlight that these legal mechanisms provide parties, particularly ANSAs, with vehicles for making contractual commitments to civilian protection (Heffes and Kotlik 2014;Sassòli 2010;Rondeau 2011). This paper aims to provide criteria that will guide protection actors and can be adopted in contracts with conflict parties to reduce civilian vulnerability to forced displacement and HLP pillage.…”

The Legal Status of the Colombian Peace Agreement

“…Indeed, one of the reasons why states and NSAGs conclude agreements "is to achieve some political recognition from States in the realm of international law." 11 Lang suggests altering the soft law/hard law distinction, proposing instead a "continuum along which lies a variety of different forms and degrees of soft law." 12 However, he does not challenge the subject/object dichotomy.…”