HUMAN

RIGHTS

Introduction:
Rationale of the Study:
International humanitarian law is a set of rules which seek, for humanitarian
reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. It protects persons who are not or are no
longer participating in the hostilities and restricts the means and methods of warfare.
International humanitarian law is also known as the law of war or the law of armed
conflict.1
International humanitarian law is part of international law, which is the body of
rules governing relations between States. International law is contained in agreements
between States treaties or conventions , in customary rules, which consist of State
practice considered by them as legally binding, and in general principles. 2
International humanitarian law applies to armed conflicts. It does not regulate
whether a State may actually use force; this is governed by an important, but distinct,
part of international law set out in the United Nations Charter.
States adopted a statute in Rome - known as the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court (the Rome Statute) - establishing the International
Criminal Court. For the first time in the history of humankind, States decided to accept
the jurisdiction of a permanent international criminal court for the prosecution of the
perpetrators of the most serious crimes committed in their territories or by their nationals
after the entry into force of the Rome Statute on 1 July 2002.
The International Criminal Court is not a substitute for national courts. According
to the Rome Statute, it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over
those responsible for international crimes. The International Criminal Court can only
intervene where a State is unable or unwilling genuinely to carry out the investigation
and prosecute the perpetrators.
1 International Committee of the Red Cross
2 https://www.icrc.org/en/document/what-international-humanitarian-law

Objective of the Study:

In this study we will further learn the background of Aleppo Syria and on how the
International Humanitarian Law is being implemented during armed conflict, and what is
the scope of the jurisdiction of International Criminal Court, can the court acquire
jurisdiction over Aleppo Syria, and how can the court acquire and enforce their authority
over the country. The scope of the study will focus on the issues of International
Humanitarian Law on how it is enforced and as to whether or not is it being
implemented during armed conflict in Aleppo Syria and on the issues confronting the
jurisdiction of International Criminal Court over Aleppo Syria. The limitations of the study
are determined to assess and to define the integrity of a particular study.

Discussion and Analysis:

International Humanitarian Law:

International Humanitarian Law is a set of rules that seek to limit the effects of
armed conflict. It protects people who are not or are no longer participating in hostilities
and restricts the means and methods of warfare.
The Sources of International Humanitarian Law are treaties and customs.
International Humanitarian Law is based on treaties, in particular the Geneva
Conventions of 1949 and their additional Protocols, and a series of other instruments.
Customary International Humanitarian Law on the other hand consist of rules that
come from a general practice accepted as law and that exist independent of treaty law.
International Humanitarian Law protects a wide range of people during armed
conflict from Civilians to Prisoners of war and detainees. International Humanitarian Law
governs the choice of weapons and prohibits or restricts the use of certain weapons
from explosive weapons in populated areas to nuclear weapons.
IHL aims to strike a balance between legitimate military objectives and the
humanitarian objective of reducing suffering, particularly among civilians.

Protection of Civilians
International Humanitarian Law provides or sets the rules that seeks to limits the
effects of armed conflict. Even wars have limits: Civilians should never be targeted; the
must be protected. Arms bearers at all times seeks the distinction between the civilian
population and combatants.

The use of explosive weapons in populated areas in times of war:

Armed conflicts are increasingly fought in population centres, but often with
weapon systems that were originally designed for use in open battlefields. When used
in populated areas, explosive weapons that have wide-area effects are very likely to
have indiscriminate effects. They are a major cause of harm to civilians and of
disruption of services essential for their survival, in effect the International Humanitarian
Law since one of their objective is to reduce suffering, particularly among civilians, the
use of explosive weapons therefore is prohibited.
When used in populated areas, explosive weapons that have wide-area effects
are very likely to have indiscriminate effects. They are a major cause of harm to civilians
and of disruption of services essential for their survival.

What are the weapons of concern and who uses them?

Explosive weapons are activated by the detonation of a high explosive substance
creating blast and fragmentation effects. The explosive weapons raising concerns when
used in populated areas are those having wide-area effects. There is generally no
cause for concern when such weapons are used in open battlefields, but when they are
used against military objectives located in populated areas their effects are often
indiscriminate and devastating for civilians.
Explosive weapons might affect a wide area because of the large destruction
radius of the individual munition used, the inaccuracy of the delivery system, and/or the
delivery of multiple munitions over a wide area. These categories of explosive weapons
include large bombs and missiles, indirect fire weapon systems such as mortars,

rockets and artillery, multi-barrel rocket launchers and certain types of improvised
explosive devices (IEDs).

The reason why explosive weapons are prohibited: the consequences for
civilians
Cities have never been immune from warfare. But over the last century, armed
conflicts have increasingly been fought in populated areas. This has exposed civilians to
greater risk of death, injury, and displacement. And the trend is likely to continue as
urbanization intensifies. In 2011, the ICRC stated that explosive weapons with widearea effects should not be used in densely populated areas due to the significant
likelihood of indiscriminate effects. In February 2015, the ICRC convened a meeting of
experts on the topic of explosive weapons in populated areas. The meeting brought
together government experts from 17 States, plus 11 individual experts, including
weapons experts and representatives of United Nations agencies and nongovernmental organizations.

Violations of International Humanitarian Law occurs:

When violations of International Humanitarian Law occur, States are under
obligation to prosecute offenders. Domestic courts therefore play an important role in
the enforcement of IHL. In addition to national jurisdictions, violations of IHL can also be
prosecuted by various international criminal tribunals.

History International Criminal Court:

On 17 July 1998, 120 States adopted a statute in Rome - known as the Rome
Statute of the International Criminal Court (the Rome Statute) - establishing the
International Criminal Court. For the first time in the history of humankind, States
decided to accept the jurisdiction of a permanent international criminal court for the
prosecution of the perpetrators of the most serious crimes committed in their territories
or by their nationals after the entry into force of the Rome Statute on 1 July 2002. 3
The International Criminal Court is not a substitute for national courts. According
to the Rome Statute, it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over
those responsible for international crimes. The International Criminal Court can only
intervene where a State is unable or unwilling genuinely to carry out the investigation
and prosecute the perpetrators. The primary mission of the International Criminal Court
is to help put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of
concern to the international community as a whole, and thus to contribute to the
prevention of such crimes. A well-informed public can contribute to guaranteeing lasting
respect for and the enforcement of international justice.
International Criminal Court
The International Criminal Court (the ICC or the Court) is a permanent international
court established to investigate, prosecute and try individuals accused of committing the
most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, namely the
crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) investigates and, where warranted, tries
individuals charged with the gravest crimes of concern to the international community:
genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Court is participating in a global
fight to end impunity, and through international criminal justice, the Court aims to hold
those responsible accountable for their crimes and to help prevent these crimes from
3 ibid

happening again. The Court cannot reach these goals alone. As a court of last resort, it
seeks to complement, not replace, national Courts. Governed by an international treaty
called the Rome Statute, the ICC is the worlds first permanent international criminal
court.4

Reason why was the ICC established

Some of the most heinous crimes were committed during the conflicts which
marked the twentieth century. Unfortunately, many of these violations of international
law have remained unpunished. The Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals were established
in the wake of the Second World War. In 1948, when the Convention on the Prevention
and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was adopted, the United Nations General
Assembly recognized the need for a permanent international court to deal with the kinds
of atrocities which had just been perpetrated. The idea of a system of international
criminal justice re-emerged after the end of the Cold War. However, while negotiations
on the ICC Statute were underway at the United Nations, the world was witnessing the
commission of heinous crimes in the territory of the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda.
In response to these atrocities, the United Nations Security Council established an ad
hoc tribunal for each of these situations. These events undoubtedly had a most
significant impact on the decision to convene the conference which established the ICC
in Rome in the summer of 1998.

4 https://www.icc-cpi.int/about

How does the ICC differ from other courts?

The ICC is a permanent autonomous court, whereas the ad hoc tribunals for the
former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, as well as other similar courts established within the
framework of the United Nations to deal with specific situations only have a limited
mandate and jurisdiction. The ICC, which tries individuals, is also different from the
International Court of Justice, which is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations
for the settlement of disputes between States. The ad hoc tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia and the International Court of Justice also have their seats in The Hague.

Conditions of ICC in order to exercise their jurisdiction

When a State becomes a party to the Rome Statute, it agrees to submit itself to
the jurisdiction of the ICC with respect to the crimes enumerated in the Statute. The
Court may exercise its jurisdiction in situations where the alleged perpetrator is a
national of a State Party or where the crime was committed in the territory of a State
Party. Also, a State not party to the Statute may decide to accept the jurisdiction of the
ICC. These conditions do not apply when the Security Council, acting under Chapter VII
of the United Nations Charter, refers a situation to the Office of the Prosecutor.
The ICC prosecutes individuals, not groups or States. Any individual who is
alleged to have committed crimes within the jurisdiction of the ICC may be brought
before the ICC. In fact, the Office of the Prosecutors prosecutorial policy is to focus on
those who, having regard to the evidence gathered, bear the greatest responsibility for
the crimes, and does not take into account any official position that may be held by the
alleged perpetrators.
No one is exempt from prosecution because of his or her current functions or
because of the position he or she held at the time the crimes concerned were

committed. Acting as a Head of State or Government, minister or parliamentarian does

not exempt anyone from criminal responsibility before the ICC. In some circumstances,
a person in a position of authority may even be held responsible for crimes committed
by those acting under his or her command or orders. Likewise, amnesty cannot be used
as a defense before the ICC. As such, it cannot bar the Court from exercising its
jurisdiction.
Aleppo
Aleppo was a place where people grew wealthy. Cuneiform tablets from roughly
four thousand years ago tell of a settlement called Halabu eventually Aleppo that
was even then a center for the manufacture of garments and cloth. Located not far from
the Mediterranean Sea on one side and the river valley of the mighty Tigris and
Euphrates on the other, the city found itself in the middle of ancient Egyptian and Hittite
trade routes. The Seleucids, a Greek dynasty descended from one of the lieutenants of
Alexander the Great, developed the area further, while certain colonnaded avenues and
courtyard homes in Aleppo today bear the tell-tale signs of Roman craftsmanship and
Hellenistic urban planning.
Following the advent of Islam and into the medieval era, Aleppo became a hub of
the Silk Road, a giant entrepot pooling in all the riches of China and India for buyers
further west, north and south. Aleppos many caravanserais and bath houses bubbled
with the chatter of different tongues; by the 16th century, numerous European merchant
houses had set up shop to try to get a piece of the action. When one of the witches in
Shakespeares Macbeth speaks of a sailors wife Her husbands to Aleppo gone,
master o th Tiger the English audience at the time would have been aware of that
faraway citys allure and majesty.
Aleppos many-layered past and cosmopolitan identity is chiseled into its very
architecture. The citys Great Mosque and Citadel a towering edifice on a hilltop at
the heart of Aleppo were statements of medieval Turco-Arab might erected atop
earlier Roman and Byzantine structures. Well into the 20th century, the city remained

home to a diverse mix of faiths and denominations. It always had a prominent,

flourishing Jewish community which, for some six centuries, zealously guarded one
of the most famous and venerated copies of the Hebrew Bible, now known as the
Aleppo Codex. In the citys outskirts, sits the Church of St. Simeon, a 5th century
Byzantine ruin built around the supposed site where Simeon, an ascetic Christian saint,
perched himself atop a pillar for 37 years, choosing, as the 18th century British historian
Edward Gibbon put it, the celestial life.
Aleppo is a city in Syria, serving as the capital of the Aleppo Governorate, the
most populous Syrian governorate. For centuries, Aleppo was the Syrian region's
largest city and the Ottoman Empire's third-largest, after Constantinople and Cairo. With
an official population of 2,132,100 (2004 census), it was Syria's largest city and also one
of the largest cities in the Levant before the advent of the Syrian Civil War. However
Aleppo, Syrias largest city, is in the grip of the countrys civil war. Government attack
helicopters and fighter jets circle the citys skies as rebel factions entrench themselves
in Aleppos old town and sections of the citys suburbs. The regime of Syrian
President Bashar Assad has dispatched armored columns to flush out insurgents, not
unlike its recent crackdown on rebel fighters in pockets of the capital Damascus. One
rebel commander in Aleppo told the U.K.s Daily Telegraph that the fight for Syrias
commercial capital, a city of 2.5 million people, would last months. Rebels are
stockpiling medical supplies and munitions, while the U.S. State Department warned of
a potential massacre. A pro-government newspaper promised the mother of all battles.

Aleppo Law and War:

In a war awash with the blood of hundreds of thousands in untold numbers of
Syrian villages, towns, cities - why should one city capture the thoughts, concerns,
anger and outrage of hundreds of millions of people around the world?
Every war has one place which consumes the attention and shame of the rest of
humanity. In Syrias unspeakable war, it is Aleppo that seems to encapsulate not just the

indiscriminate horror of the whole of the war - but the Wests now undeniably bankrupt
policy on the Syrian conflict, the wider worlds sense of anger yet helplessness and the
daily, very personal tragedies of doctors, hospitals, rescue workers and children crying
out for international law to protect them - but instead finding a deafening silence in
response to their pleas.
A very simple first answer as to why Aleppo matters is the same age-old one as to why
Sarajevo or Gaza or Soweto mattered. Because a few brave people are there to capture
its suffering.

The city has been devastated by the attacks:

the real reasons why Aleppo matters are far more profound and in some senses
go far beyond the ebb and flow of the Syrian wars strategic fortunes and realities.
Aleppo matters firstly because fundamental international laws are being violated in front
of our eyes in such a way that if they are permitted to continue, the nature, scope and
effect of future wars and their humanitarian effect will have frightening consequences.
Chemical weapons have been dropped on civilian areas, UN aid convoys have been
bombed - possibly by the war planes of a member of the UN Security Council (Russia),
hospitals, clinics, even pediatric hospitals have been deliberately targeted.

Aleppos biggest hospital hit by barrel bombs, reports say:

The largest hospital in rebel-held east Aleppo has been hit by barrel bombs and
cluster bombs, according to reports from the city.
The hospital, referred to as M10, was last attacked just three days ago, a move UN
Secretary General Ban Ki Moon denounced as a war crime.

In a statement released on Friday, MSF said the indiscriminate bombing in Aleppo

carried out by Syria and allied governments is causing a "bloodbath", while calling for
increased protection for medical facilities. Children have been killed in Aleppo in recent
weeks, according to the World Health Organization.
Attacks against health facilities have also escalated, with Physicians for Human
Rights (PHR) reporting 6 airstrikes on medical facilities in Aleppo between 24 and 31
July in the worst week for attacks on hospitals since the conflict began. These attacks
occurred despite the UN Security Council (UNSC) passing Resolution 2286 on 3 May,
strongly condemning attacks on medical facilities. PHR has documented 373 attacks on
health facilities in Syria between March 2011 and May 2016, the vast majority
committed by the Syrian government and its allies.

Attacks on civilians in Aleppo

The attacks on civilians in the Syrian city of Aleppo amount to a "breach of
international humanitarian law," senior European officials said on Saturday, urging the
international community to intensify peace efforts.

Chemical attack on Aleppo

The Syrian city of Aleppo has been hit by a suspected chlorine attack, which
would amount to a war crime if confirmed, and constitutes an alarming sign that Syrian
government forces are intensifying their use of chemical weapons against civilians,
Amnesty International. The attack on a residential neighbourhood in a part of Aleppo
controlled by armed groups is the third reported use of chemical weapons in northern

Syria in just two weeks and has reportedly killed at least four people. Amnesty
International has confirmed at least 60 others, mostly children, sought medical care
after showing symptoms characteristic of a chlorine attack. 5

Conclusion:
After due determination and consolidation of the resources and references used in the
paper. The researcher has arrived in the following conclusions:
War crimes have been committed in Syria by all of the (Syrian) parties. The vast
majority have been committed by Syrian government armed forces and associated
militia and thats continuing on a huge scale. Theres no doubt that the vast majority has
been committed by the Syrian government. They can start with the things they do to
5 https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/08/syria-fresh-chemical-attack-onaleppo-a-war-crime/

captured people. And its not just captured opposition fighters. It's human rights
defenders, journalists, people suspected of having political sympathies for the
opposition -- whether on the basis of their ethnicity or their religion, their perceived
political affiliation. Weve documented that thousands of these people have been
tortured, subjected to enforced disappearance, and killed in custody. Just the torture
that they've committed has been on an industrial scale.

For these suspected war crimes by Syria itself and by Russia, there is no
jurisdiction in Syria for the International Criminal Court (ICC). Syria isn't a party to it.
Russia isn't a party to it. You could have the jurisdiction of the ICC with a UN Security
Council referral. But because of the power politics and the permanent Security Council
members' veto, that has not happened. Russia would never go for that. The only way
somebody could be prosecuted -- a Syrian or Russian commander who orders an attack
on an aid convoy deliberately and knowing full well, not by mistake -- that could only be
adjudicated through universal jurisdiction in which another state's court has jurisdiction
over war crimes in a nonintentional armed conflict. Another possibility, if it cant get an

ICC referral, would be to set up some sort of special tribunal. But then again,
they really need the Security Council's cooperation for that.