States’ Use of Force in Protecting National Territorial Integrity: Scope and Limits of Common Article 3 and Additional Protocols

Abstract

The isolation suffered by non-international armed conflicts is not unconnected with the reluctance
of states to adopt a comprehensive legal framework for such conflicts, though this is often
considered as matters falling within the purview of their domestic jurisdiction. Such states being
fiercely protective of their sovereignty and wary of external interference(s) have often opposed the
idea of subjecting their national affairs to international scrutiny and regulation. Moreover states
ultimately consider the activities of rebel factions as illegal, being done in contravention of their
national legislations. International humanitarian law provides for various sets of rules that
regulate the conduct of hostilities, and overtime, developed and codified in numerous international
and national instruments including treaties, conventions, declarations and national legislations.
Through the foregoing, it attempts to alleviate the adverse effect of armed conflicts through
institutionalizing and enforcing measures that ensure the continued protection of the weak and
vulnerable during armed conflict. This article analysis the relevance of Common Article 3 and
Additional Protocol II in contemporary non international armed conflicts by exploring the
applicable and protective scopes of these legislations, and explore the extent of protection
available, while highlighting their points of divergence.
Key Words: We will be considering the meaning of some key terms which are germane to the
work. The essence of this, is to put in perspective the theme of the work for better appreciation of
its significance.