Jus ad bellum versus jus in bello

• Hamas’s attacks in Israel on October 7 and Israel’s response in the Gaza Strip have been war crimes met with more apparent war crimes.
• There are two laws associated with wars.

JUS AD BELLUM

• Defines the legitimate reasons a state may engage in war.
• It finds its source in United Nations Charter of 1945.
• Article 2 prohibits members from use of force against territorial integrity or political independence of any State.
• Article 51 of provides inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs.

JUS IN BELLO

• Known as international humanitarian law (IHL) and provides rules to be followed during armed conflict.
• It finds its sources in Hague Conventions (1899 and 1907) and 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols (1977).
• Its purpose is to save lives and reduce suffering.
• Both governmental forces and non-state armed groups need to respect IHL.
• Breach of law may lead to prosecution for War crime.
• In 1998 under Rome Statute an international criminal court, was established for repressing inter alia war crimes.
• IHL has four basic principles that seek to minimize the impact of war on civilians and non-combatants :–
  • Humanity refers generally to restraint in and limiting war’s impact on human security and health.
  • Distinction refers to the obligation to differentiate between civilians and civilian objects as well as combatants and military objects.
  • Proportionality provides that even where attacks target military objectives, they cannot cause civilian harm that is “excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.”
  • Military necessity recognizes that a legitimate military objective is to weaken the capacity of opposing parties and win a battle or war, though this objective must be exercised in accordance with IHL principles intended to minimize harm.