The rules of the “game”

Mudjadjo"

The origins of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), also known as the Law of War or the Law of Armed Conflict, are intertwined with the origins of International Law itself, since relations between States were, in the beginning, essentially military in nature. The Law of War included what is conventionally called jus in bello, customary military practices, which developed over time on all continents. The Law of War also covered another set of rules, the so-called jus ad bellum, which regulated the right to war. IHL represents the legal expression of the feeling of humanity that corresponds to the benevolence and compassion that we feel for our fellow human beings. However, we only feel compassion for those whom we recognize as being part of humanity, and this concept, with the opening of spaces and the interpenetration of cultures, has undergone an evolution that is still in its infancy. IHL does not impose a vision of humanity (as some believe it does in certain international human rights instruments), but simply proposes to maintain the physical integrity and dignity of individuals in armed conflicts. While it is true that human beings are sometimes moved by feelings of cruelty, it is also true that they are moved by pain and a sense of humanity, which, like suffering, is also universal. Since it is impossible to make human beings renounce war, it is the sense of humanity that leads them to oppose its effects. IHL thus sets out the rules applicable during armed conflicts, whether international or not, which have a dual purpose: to restrict the rights of combatants by limiting the methods and means of warfare and to protect the rights of non-combatants, civilians and soldiers hors de combat. IHL aims to humanise war by disciplining human beings in their acts of armed violence and by protecting those in dangerous situations. The sources of international humanitarian law are of customary origin, but were largely codified during the 20th century and, in most cases, continue to have customary value for States that have not ratified or acceded to the conventional texts. Protecting humanity from the reality of war is the, at first sight, paradoxical objective of IHL. To this end, it is necessary, on the one hand, to restrict the rights of combatants in the conduct of hostilities and, on the other, to protect the rights of non-combatants, civilians and military personnel hors de combat. In its origins, IHL represents the legal expression of the feeling of humanity that corresponds to the benevolence and compassion that we feel for our fellow human beings. However, we only feel compassion for those we recognize as being part of humanity and this concept, with the opening of spaces and the interpenetration of cultures, has undergone an evolution that is still in progress today. Starting from a restricted meaning that confined the “similar” to the limited circle of people who shared the same system of values and the same identity, humanity was seen in a universal way, with all human beings recognized as “neighbors”, regardless of their race, nationality, ethnicity, opinions Political or religious or any other unfavourable criterion). On the combatant's side, IHL provides for restrictions on the conduct of hostilities; on the victim's side, this branch of law sets out the mechanisms for protecting persons who have fallen into the power of the enemy. It is therefore a question of regulating hostilities in order to mitigate their circumstances, by limiting the use of violence, provided that this is compatible with military needs and with a view to respecting the dignity of the person, even when he is an enemy, to the maximum extent possible.

2025/12/3