Critical Analysis of the Effective Enforcement of the Fundamental Principles of International Humanitarian Law

Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Bukar; M-GLP; AFHEA-UK; Ph.D

doi:10.56201/JLGP.vol.11.no4.2026.pg199.208

📄 Download Paper

Critical Analysis of the Effective Enforcement of the Fundamental Principles of International Humanitarian Law

Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim Bukar, M-GLP, AFHEA-UK, Ph.D

Abstract

The basic principle of international humanitarian law lies in the prohibition of conducts considered to be cruel, unnecessary and dishonorable in armed conflicts. Contemporary efforts to bring international humanitarian law rules into force by minimizing civilian casualties in armed conflicts have raised serious questions particularly as it relates to the fundamental principles of IHL including, distinction, proportionality and precaution. In an effort to strike this balance, developments of new technology and the prevalence of asymmetric conflicts within and outside the borders of States have created uncertainty regarding the precise interpretation in the application of these principles. This paper examined the effective application of these fundamental principles of international humanitarian law in the management of contemporary armed conflicts, and assessed the role these principles play in moderating the effects of war on civilians and civilian objects. The paper argued that the fundamental objective of these principles can only be achieved by limiting parties’ choice of weapons and prioritizing the protection of civilians and civilian objects. The paper concluded that without the effective application of these principles, there would be no international mechanism to mitigate the devastating effects of conflict, potentially leading to widespread atrocities and immense human suffering.

Keywords

International Humanitarian LawDistinctionProportionalityPrecaution and Armed Conflict

References

Adler, J (1970). Targets in War: Legal Considerations, Houston Law Review, 8 (1) p 8 Agnieszka, J (2016). The Concept of Military Objectives in International Law and Targeting Practice (Ed) Routledge New York, Publisher p 69 Andresen, J (2017). Putting Lethal Force on the Table: How Drones Change the Alternative Space of War and Counter-Terrorism, Harvard National Security Journal, 8(2) p. 427 Anita, N (2020). The Principle of Distinction in the Light of Civilian Protection in International Armed Conflict, African Journal of Law and Human Rights, 4(2) pp 78- 89 Aurel, S (2025). Indiscriminate Attacks and the Proportionality Rule: What is Incidental Civilian Harm? Journal of Conflict and Security Law, 30(2) pp 203-239 Bartels, R (2013). Dealing with the Principle of Proportionality in Armed Conflict in Retrospect: The Application of the Principle in International Criminal Trials, Israel Law Review, 46(2) p. 274 Benjamin, D (2011). International Humanitarian Law- Weapon of Choice for the Lawless, Regent Journal of Law and Public Policy, 3 p 52 Bothe, M (1982). New Rules for Victims of Armed Conflicts: Commentary on the II 1977 Protocols Additional to the 1949, Geneva Conventions (Ed) Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers Charles, P (2015). Re-Thinking the Principle of Proportionality Outside of Hot Battlefields Virginia Journal of International Law, 55(3) p. 542 Charles, P, T (2024). Collateral Damage and Individual Rights in Armed Conflict, Fordham International Law Journal, 48(2) pp 522-574 Charlotte, L (2013). Modern Technologies and Targeting under International Humanitarian Law, IFHV Working Paper, 3(3) p 25 Daniele, L (2024). Incidentality of the Civilian Harm in International Humanitarian Law and its Contra Legem Antonyms in Recent Discourse on the Laws of War, Journal of

Critical Analysis of the Effective Enforcement of the Fundamental Principles of International Humanitarian Law

Abstract

Keywords

References

More Articles from JOURNAL OF LAW AND GLOBAL POLICY