Jus in Bello and the Geneva Conventions
Jus in Bello, or as it is also known, International Humanitarian Law, are laws in place to “regulate how wars are fought, without prejudice to the reasons of how or why they had begun.” (Nabulsi, 2015). The Geneva Conventions, four conventions held in 1949, were, “a series of treaties on the treatment of civilians, prisoners of war (POWs) and soldiers,” who were, “rendered…incapable of fighting,” which were instigated by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The laws agreed upon in the Geneva Conventions were outlines of actions which constituted as ‘just’ or ‘unjust’, according to the principles of Jus in Bello.
There are three main areas which the laws of Jus in Bello cover: the keeping of good faith, discrimination between combatants and non-combatants, and proportionality in the use of force (Maiese, 2015). Keeping in good faith can be adequately defined as fighting in a way so as to work towards reconciliation with the opposing side (Legal Information Institute, 2015). This involves treating prisoners of war (POW’s) humanly and in congruence with the guidelines which were agreed upon in the Geneva Conventions (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Discrimination between combatants and non-combatants can be precisely described as the keeping separate of those who have forfeited some of their rights temporarily and have directly engaged in war, and those who are considered civilians, and are not directly involved in warfare (Maiese, 2015). Michelle Maiese, a research staff at the Conflict Research Consortium, claims that proportionality in the use of force encompasses areas such as “weapons used during war,” limits in “scope and level of violence,” and the amount of force that is “morally appropriate.” (Maiese, 2015). In essence, no action that produces more harm than good should be engaged in during the outbreak of war (Maiese, 2015).
The Geneva Conventions delved deeper into the laws of Jus in Bello, and aimed to set rules and regulations more specific to modern- day warfare (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The first convention, “protects wounded and infirm soldiers and medical personnel against attack, execution without judgment, torture, and assaults upon personal dignity. It also grants them the right to proper medical treatment and care.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The second convention, “extended the protections mentioned in the first Convention to shipwrecked soldiers and other naval forces, including special protections afforded to hospital ships.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The third convention, “defined what a Prisoner of War was, and accorded them proper and humane treatment as specified by the first Convention.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Specifically, this convention required that POW’s only give their “name, rank, and serial number to their captors.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Nations that were present at the convention were under no circumstances allowed to, “use torture to extract information from POW’s.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The final convention, convention four, ensured that civilians were, “afforded…protections from inhumane treatment and attack.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). This convention also prohibited military attacks on medical transports and civilian hospitals (Legal Information Institute, 2015). It also made clear the, “right of internees, and those who commit acts of sabotage,”, and discussed how occupants were to “treat an occupied populace.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Any violation in these laws resulted in the war being deemed ‘unjust’. America ratified the Geneva Conventions, however Japan only signed, meaning that they had not officially agreed to all the terms and conditions, although they indicated that they would, “follow the Geneva rules.” (PBS, 2015).
There are three main areas which the laws of Jus in Bello cover: the keeping of good faith, discrimination between combatants and non-combatants, and proportionality in the use of force (Maiese, 2015). Keeping in good faith can be adequately defined as fighting in a way so as to work towards reconciliation with the opposing side (Legal Information Institute, 2015). This involves treating prisoners of war (POW’s) humanly and in congruence with the guidelines which were agreed upon in the Geneva Conventions (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Discrimination between combatants and non-combatants can be precisely described as the keeping separate of those who have forfeited some of their rights temporarily and have directly engaged in war, and those who are considered civilians, and are not directly involved in warfare (Maiese, 2015). Michelle Maiese, a research staff at the Conflict Research Consortium, claims that proportionality in the use of force encompasses areas such as “weapons used during war,” limits in “scope and level of violence,” and the amount of force that is “morally appropriate.” (Maiese, 2015). In essence, no action that produces more harm than good should be engaged in during the outbreak of war (Maiese, 2015).
The Geneva Conventions delved deeper into the laws of Jus in Bello, and aimed to set rules and regulations more specific to modern- day warfare (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The first convention, “protects wounded and infirm soldiers and medical personnel against attack, execution without judgment, torture, and assaults upon personal dignity. It also grants them the right to proper medical treatment and care.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The second convention, “extended the protections mentioned in the first Convention to shipwrecked soldiers and other naval forces, including special protections afforded to hospital ships.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The third convention, “defined what a Prisoner of War was, and accorded them proper and humane treatment as specified by the first Convention.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Specifically, this convention required that POW’s only give their “name, rank, and serial number to their captors.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Nations that were present at the convention were under no circumstances allowed to, “use torture to extract information from POW’s.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). The final convention, convention four, ensured that civilians were, “afforded…protections from inhumane treatment and attack.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). This convention also prohibited military attacks on medical transports and civilian hospitals (Legal Information Institute, 2015). It also made clear the, “right of internees, and those who commit acts of sabotage,”, and discussed how occupants were to “treat an occupied populace.” (Legal Information Institute, 2015). Any violation in these laws resulted in the war being deemed ‘unjust’. America ratified the Geneva Conventions, however Japan only signed, meaning that they had not officially agreed to all the terms and conditions, although they indicated that they would, “follow the Geneva rules.” (PBS, 2015).