Contemporary Issues in International Humanitarian Law As Applied to Internal Armed Conflict Arturo Carrillo-Suárz
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
American University International Law Review Volume 15 | Issue 1 Article 1 1999 Hors de Logique: Contemporary Issues in International Humanitarian Law as Applied to Internal Armed Conflict Arturo Carrillo-Suárz Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/auilr Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Carrillo-Suárz, Arturo. "Hors de Logique: Contemporary Issues in International Humanitarian Law as Applied to Internal Armed Conflict." American University International Law Review 15, no. 1 (1999): 1-150. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Washington College of Law Journals & Law Reviews at Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in American University International Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ American University Washington College of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HoRs DE LOGIQUE: CONTEMPORARY ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW AS APPLIED TO INTERNAL ARMED CONFLICT ARTURO CARRILLO-SUAREZ* INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 2 I. THE CASE STUDY: CIVIL CONFLICT AND HUMANITARIAN LAW IN COLOMBIA ............................ 10 A . BACKGROUND ...................................................................... 10 1. Military and Security Forces .......................................... 11 2. Guerrilla Groups ............................................................. 13 3. ParamilitayGroups ...................................................... 16 B. INTERNAL CONFLICT AND HUMANITARIAN LAW .................. 18 C. NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION OF IHL .................................. 29 1. Introduction to the Colombian PoliticalSistem .............. 30 2. Implementation of InternationalHumanitarian Law....... 34 a. Government and State Authorities ............................... 34 b. N on-state actors .......................................................... 48 c. The International Committee of the Red Cross ........... 53 D. THE NEW PEACE PROCESS ....................................................... 55 1. The FAR C ........................................................................ 56 2. The ELN ........................................................................... 60 3. The AUC/ACCU.............................................................. 64 II. THE APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF HUMANITARIAN LAW N CIVIL CONFLICT .................. 66 * LL.M., Columbia Law School; J.D., George Washington University Law School; B.A., Princeton University. The author is grateful to Lori Damrosch, Robert Weiner and Peter Danchin for their helpful comments on prior drafts of this Article. Special thanks are due to Louis Henkin and the Human Rights In- stitute at Columbia Law School, and to the Ford Foundation, for their support. Readers are welcome to send their comments to <[email protected]>. AM. U. INTL L. REV. [15:1 A. THE SCOPE OF APPLICATION OF PROTOCOL II ..................... 67 1. The Evolution and Background of Article 1 of Protocol II....................................................................... 68 2. The Modern InterpretationofArticle 1 of Protocol II ......... 79 3. Article 1 Analysis of the Colombian Conflict .................. 90 a. Ability to Implement the Protocol ............................... 91 b. Control Over a Part of the Territory ............................. 93 c. Sustained and Concerted Military Operations ............. 95 d. The Responsible Command .......................................... 96 e. Conclusion ................................................................... 97 B. THE INTERPRETATION OF IHL IN THE COLOMBIAN CONFLICT ............................................................................. 97 1. State R esponsibility............................................................ 101 2. Guerrilla and ParamilitaryResponsibility under IHL ...... 109 3. InternationalCriminal Responsibility.for Individuals....... 112 4. The Myth of Insufficiency ................................................... 114 III. THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HUMANITARIAN LAW IN CIV IL CON FLICT ............................................................... 121 A. THE COLOMBIAN CASE STUDY REVISITED ............................ 121 B. CONSTRUCTING COMPLIANCE IN COLOMBIA ......................... 124 1. The Role of the United States ............................................. 128 2. InternationalOrganizations ............................................... 134 3. InternationalNon-governmental Organizations................ 138 C. AN ANALYSIS OF COMPLIANCE AND ITS FUTURE P RO SPECTS ............................................................................. 14 1 1. The Causes of Non-compliance with IHL .......................... 141 2. Why Acceptance ofIHL Matters........................................ 145 C O N C LU SIO N ............................................................................... 149 INTRODUCTION Given the primacy of internal wars in contemporary international society,' and the fact that they are responsible for the vast majority 1. See HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH, WAR WITHOUT QUARTER: COLOMBIA AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW (1998) [hereinafter WAR WITHOUT QUARTER] (providing a detailed analysis of the internal war in Colombia); Ste- ven R. David, The Primacy of Internal War, in INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 1999] HORS DE LOGIQLE of the victims of armed conflict in general,2 it is surprising to find that much of the attention of international law scholars lies else- where. Indeed, most discussion in the field of international hu- manitarian law ("IlL") focuses on subjects not directly related to the problem of applying it in internal conflicts. Some common topics include the law of international armed conflicts' and the con- duct of hostilities,4 the progressive development of conventional and customary norms, especially as concerns international criminal tribunals5 and humanitarian intervention and assistance.' It is true THEORY AND THE THIRD WORLD 77 (Stephanie G. Nueman ed., 1995) (noting the threat of internal wars on global security); see also John R. Crook, Strengthening Legal Protection in Internal Conflicts: Introductory Remarks: Panel on Internal Conflicts, 3 ILSA J. INT'L & COMP. L. 491 (1997). 2. See David, supra note 1, at 77 (noting that a majonty of the 150 wars af- ter World War II had been internal wars of one type or another). 3. See, e.g., THE HANDBOOK OF HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ARMED CONFLICTS (Dieter Fleck ed., 1995); THE GULF WAR OF 1980-88: THE IRAN-IRAQ WAR IN INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PERSPECTIVE (Ige F. Dekker et al. eds., 1994); HILAIRE MCCOUBREY & NIGEL D. WHITE, INTERNATIONAL LAW AND ARMED CONFLICT (1992); EDWARD KWAKWA, THE INTERNATIONAL LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT: PERSONAL AND MATERIAL FIELDS OF APPLICATION (1992); Louise Doswald- Beck, CurrentDevelopment: The San Remo Manual on hIternationalLaw Appli- cable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 89 AM. J. INT'L L. 192 (1995). 4. See, e.g., ARMED CONFLICT AND THE NEW LAW: ASPECT'S OF THE 1977 GENEVA PROTOCOLS AND THE 1981 WEAPONS CONVENTION (Michael A. Meyer ed., 1989); R.J. Arajuo, S.J., Anti-Personnel Mines and Peremptory Norms of International Law: Argument and Catalyst, 30 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 1 (1997); Michael J. Matheson, The Opinions of the International Court of Justice on the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, 91 AM. J. INT'L L. 417 (1997). 5. See, e.g., VIRGINIA MORRIS & MICHAEL P. SCHARF, AN INSIDERS GUIDE TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA (1995); THE LAW OF WAR CRIMES: NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL APPROACHES (Timothy L.H. McCormack et al. eds., 1997); \\AR CRIMES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW (Yoram Dinstein et al. eds.. 1996): Payam Akhavan, The International Crimnal Tribunal .for Rwanda: The politics and pragmatics oJ punishment, 90 AM. J. INT'L L. 501 (1996); Christopher Keith Hall, Current Development: The Sixth Session of the UN PreparatoryComnttee on the Estab- lishment of an International Crimninal Court, 92 AM. J. INT'L L. 548 (1998); Marie-Claude Roberge, Jurisdiction of the ad hoc Tribunals lbr the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda over Crimes against Humanity and Genocide, 321 INT'L REV. RED CROSS 651 (1997); Paul Tavernier, The Erperience of the Interna- tional Criminal Tribunalsfor the forner Yugoslavia and for Rwanda, 321 INT'L REV. RED CROSS 605 (1997). 6. See, e.g., FRANCOIS BUNGION, LE COMITE INTERNATIONAL DE LA CROIX- AM. U. INT'L L. REV. [15:1 that the recent creation of an International Criminal Court, and es- pecially the prior establishment by the United Nations Security Council of the ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, have led to new developments in the international crimi- nalization of internal atrocities.7 Yet the fact remains that, this not- withstanding, relatively little attention is paid to how existing hu- manitarian norms apply in the specific context of internal wars. The present Article aims to rectify this state of affairs by focus- ing on the internal war in Colombia as a case study. The long- standing conflict in Colombia provides an ideal factual and con- ceptual framework within which to examine key issues relating to the humanitarian law of non-international armed conflicts. By con- centrating on several practical questions raised by the application of the laws of war in Colombia, I want to suggest that, despite formi- dable obstacles, deeper legal analysis and non-conventional meth- ods of