Doha, Qatar: The National Committee for International Humanitarian Law (NCIHL) expressed its deep concern and strong condemnation of the missile and drone attacks targeting the territory of the State of Qatar, launched from the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Committee stressed that these attacks occurred within the context of an ongoing international armed conflict involving other parties, in which the State of Qatar is not participating. It noted that extending military operations into the territory of a state not party to the conflict raises serious issues of international legal responsibility under both general international law and international humanitarian law.
The Committee explained that such actions constitute a violation of the prohibition on the use of force enshrined in Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations, which forbids the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. It added that such operations may also engage the rules of international humanitarian law, particularly when their consequences affect the civilian population or civilian objects.
In a statement issued yesterday, the Committee outlined a number of fundamental legal principles governing such situations, foremost among them the principle of distinction, a cornerstone of international humanitarian law. Article 48 of Additional Protocol I of 1977 requires parties to an armed conflict to distinguish at all times between civilians and combatants, and between civilian objects and military objectives, and to direct military operations exclusively against military objectives.
The Committee further noted that Article 52(1) of the same Protocol clearly stipulates that civilian objects must not be the object of attack.
Accordingly, the Committee stressed that any attack that strikes, or may strike, civilian objects or populated areas within the territory of a state not participating in the conflict raises a strong presumption of a violation of the principle of distinction and necessitates a thorough legal investigation to determine the extent to which the relevant obligations under international humanitarian law have been respected.
The Committee also emphasised that indiscriminate attacks are strictly prohibited under international humanitarian law. Article 51(4) of Additional Protocol I prohibits attacks that are not directed at a specific military objective or that employ means and methods of warfare whose effects cannot be limited as required by international humanitarian law.
Furthermore, Article 51(5)(b) prohibits attacks expected to cause incidental civilian casualties or damage to civilian objects that would be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage, in accordance with the principle of proportionality.
The Committee also recalled that Article 57 obliges parties to a conflict to take all feasible precautions to avoid or minimise incidental harm to civilians and civilian objects. It warned that the use of weapons with wide-area or inaccurate effects in or near populated civilian areas may constitute a serious violation of these provisions.
In addition, the Committee stressed that international humanitarian law strictly prohibits the intimidation of civilian populations. Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I explicitly states that civilians shall not be the object of attack and prohibits acts or threats of violence intended primarily to spread terror among the civilian population.
The Committee clarified that military actions or threats of force that generate fear and panic among civilians -- even in the absence of direct casualties may constitute a clear violation of this rule, as the protection of civilians extends to protection from deliberate intimidation.
