This article studies the recent violations of International Humanitarian Law by Russia in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and focuses on the difficulties to apply sanctions.
International Humanitarian law is a set of rules which seek, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflicts. It protects people who are not participating in the hostilities, such as civilians and restricts the means and methods of warfare. A major part of international humanitarian law is contained in four Geneva conventions, which were entered into in 1949, in the wake of the atrocities and occupation of countries that took place during the Second world War. Specifically: the first convention which deals with the wounded and sick soldiers on land during warfare; the second convention which deals with wounded, sick and shipwrecked military personal at sea during war; the third convention that applies to prisoners of war; and the fourth Convention that affords protection to civilians, including in occupied territories.
Additional protocols followed in 1977, essentially dealing with strengthening the protection of victims of international (Protocol I) and non-international (Protocol II) armed conflicts and placing limits on the way wars are fought. Nearly every State in the world has agreed to be bound by the four Geneva Conventions, including Russia and Ukraine.
The Russo-Ukrainian conflict is an international armed conflict, that has begun late February 2022. According to the article 12 of the Convention, as soon as a single person is wounded and reported due to the armed conflict, the Convention must be applied (ICRC, 2004). The ratification by the two States and the current situation with an elevated number of deaths and wounded people undoubtedly make the current Russo-Ukrainian conflict subject to the rules set out in the prior mentioned Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols.
Three hospitals were hit by bombs over the past week. On Tuesday 1 March 2022, a missile strike destroyed the Pavlusenko maternity hospital in Zhytomyr, 150 kilometers west of Kyiv. (Till, 2022) According to reporters and Ukraine’s foreign ministry, two people died in the bombing. This isn’t the first time a hospital is under attack. On the24,and 28 February 2022, two other hospitals in Vulhedar and in Kharkiv were attacked (human rights watch, 2022).
According to the article 19 of the First Geneva Convention, “Fixed establishments and mobile medical units of the Medical Service may in no circumstances be attacked, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties of the conflict”. While these breaches appear to be clearly attributable to Russia, the question is what could, and should be done to hold Russia accountable for them.
The Convention and Protocol make it clear that grave breaches must be punished, however they do not specify penalties nor do they create a tribunal. Instead, they indicate that States are responsible for the enaction of criminals and the application of sanctions in all countries, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrator. This principle, called universal jurisdiction, is a key element in ensuring the effective repression of grave breaches. (ICRC, 2004)
Prior comparable events where Russia was involved illustrate the current difficulties in pursuing such crimes. Indeed, despite the ratification of the Convention, this isn’t the first time Russia decides to aim for hospitals in conflicts. In 1999 Russia had strongly bombed a maternity hospital in Grozny, Chechnya. In Syria, starting September 2015, when Russia came to the defense of Bashar Al Assad, over 243 attacks on medical facilities and killing of 112 medical personnel were recorded. (Syrian Network for human rights , 2017)
Many organizations have tried to bring sanctions to Russia for these actions, but these cases are challenging. The technological advances in the past 20 years could come as help in proving the existence of the attacks, however as much as digital information is easy to capture and share, it is also easy to manipulate. Eyewitness is an organization that ensures data captured by civilians in war zones meets the rigorous standards needed for use in future prosecutions. (Eyewitness Global, 2020) This allows organizations to prove the attacks did happen. However, the intent requirement is required and remains the most demanding. The difficulty to prove that the bombing of a hospital or an ambulance is a war crime relies on proving that the attack was intentional, and this gets down to intelligence. (Nuzban, 2022). In war zones, this kind of evidence is detained by governments that are often reluctant to share such information, because they don’t want to incriminate countries from which they could suffer retaliation.
In conflicts, Russia tends to violate International Humanitarian Law, however holding Russia and Putin accountable for their war crimes in Ukraine will be laborious as long as Governments decide to fear backlash and don’t share the necessary information to condemn the violations.
Bibliography
Till, B. (2022). Is Russia targeting Ukraine's hospitals ? . The new republic.
human rights watch. (2022). Russian cluster munition hits hospital . Human Rights Watch.
Syrian Network for human rights . (2017). attacks on vital facilities in Syria. reliefweb , 1-2.
Eyewitness Global. (2020). Using verifiable footage to fight for adequate housing in Ukraine. Eyewitness Global.
Nuzban, Y. (2022). IRCC n°915. International review.
ICRC. (2004, January). Penal repression: Punishing war crimes. Retrieved from ICRC.org: https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/penal_repression.pdf
ICRC. (2004, July). What is internatonal Humanitarian Law. Retrieved from ICRC.org: https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/assets/files/other/what_is_ihl.pdf
Comments