Sexual violence in armed conflicts constitutes a grave violation of international law and a fundamental affront to human dignity. Despite its express prohibition under international humanitarian law (IHL), international human rights law (IHRL), and international criminal law (ICL), the systematic perpetration of sexual violence continues to be a pervasive feature of modern warfare. This dissertation critically examines the legal frameworks governing sexual violence in armed conflicts, assessing their effectiveness in ensuring accountability for perpetrators and providing justice for survivors.

The study highlights the evolving jurisprudence on conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV), particularly through landmark decisions by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the International Criminal Court (ICC). While these legal instruments have established sexual violence as a war crime, crime against humanity, and, in some cases, an act of genocide, the enforcement of these norms remains fraught with evidentiary, procedural, and political challenges.

The dissertation further scrutinizes the role of international organizations, including the United Nations and its peacekeeping missions, in preventing and addressing sexual violence. Despite progressive normative developments, such as UN Security Council Resolutions 1325, 1820, and 2467, persistent gaps in implementation, political resistance, and the failure of international bodies to hold state and non-state actors accountable have perpetuated a culture of impunity.

By analysing case studies from conflicts in Syria, Ukraine, and the Democratic Republic of Congo, this research underscores the urgent need for legal and institutional reforms to strengthen enforcement mechanisms, enhance survivor-centered approaches, and address structural barriers to justice. The dissertation concludes by offering policy recommendations aimed at closing the accountability gap, improving domestic legal frameworks, and fostering international cooperation to combat sexual violence in armed conflicts effectively. Without a concerted effort to bridge the divide between legal norms and practical enforcement, the international legal regime will continue to fall short in its obligation to protect victims and prosecute perpetrators of sexual violence in war.

Introduction
The informed expectations of every individual fundamentally support the culture of human rights. While it is the responsibility of states to protect these rights, it is the understanding, respect, and anticipation of human rights by each person that truly gives human rights their substance and significance in daily life.

Rights and duties are two interconnected elements within the broader framework of "values," all of which are directed toward preserving and promoting human dignity. The concept of cultural relativism has influenced varying interpretations and prioritizations of rights and duties, revealing how these ideas are shaped by cultural and historical contexts. The twentieth century was notable for its commitment to establishing universal standards for human rights. This predominantly Eurocentric perspective, embodied in documents like the United Nations Charter, is based on the understanding that lasting peace and global stability rely on principles of social justice and the protection of human rights.

Social justice calls for equitable access to resources and opportunities for all individuals, while human rights emphasize the inherent worth and dignity of each person. Foundational human rights instruments, beginning with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), are primarily aimed at eliminating oppression, inequality, and deprivation, ultimately seeking to build a fair and just society. Equally vital is the identification and eradication of the conditions that give rise to human rights abuses, which underpins the legal and philosophical rejection of war.

Despite widespread moral and legal opposition to warfare and violence, such conflicts remain a persistent part of human society, affecting both individual lives and broader communities. Nevertheless, upholding and advancing human rights and fundamental freedoms remains essential, even when global systems of peace and security falter. Out of this imperative, International Humanitarian Law (IHL) has developed, with the goal of reducing human suffering during conflicts and ensuring a more humane approach to warfare.

IHL seeks to protect civilians from the devastation of war and to ensure humane treatment of combatants and prisoners of war.

Historically, warfare has been a male-dominated domain, often sidelining the experiences and needs of women. However, there is growing recognition of the distinct and disproportionate impact that armed conflict has on women, prompting increased calls for gender-specific protections in war. Incidents such as the systematic sexual violence committed by pro-government forces and ISIS in Syria, the documented abuse of women and girls in Ukraine by occupying troops, and the gender-based violence endured by Afghan women during years of conflict highlight the urgent need for tailored legal and humanitarian responses. These crimes inflict severe harm on individuals and destabilize entire communities, leaving enduring physical, emotional, and societal trauma.

This study focuses on examining how women are protected in conflict settings by evaluating the effectiveness of international legal instruments like the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute. It also investigates the roles played by both international and national systems in addressing and preventing sexual violence. To fully understand the necessity of such protections, the research delves into the status of women in contemporary conflict zones, the systemic nature of the violence they face, and the socio-political and cultural dynamics that perpetuate these abuses. Through this exploration, the study seeks to contribute to the broader human rights dialogue and promote sustainable strategies for safeguarding women during times of war.

Literature Review
Gloria Gaggioli[1], highlights the pervasive nature of sexual violence in modern armed conflicts and underscores its absolute prohibition under international humanitarian law, human rights law, and international criminal law. She emphasizes that these legal frameworks not only reinforce each other but also hold perpetrators individually accountable for sexual crimes. Despite this robust legal foundation, Gaggioli expresses concern over the persistent gap between the law and its implementation, noting that this discrepancy cannot be attributed to legal ambiguities or gaps. Instead, she advocates for innovative strategies to enhance the enforcement of existing laws at both domestic and international levels, ensuring that legal standards are translated into effective action on the ground.

Megan Bastick, Karin Grimm, and Rahel Kunz[2] examine the widespread occurrence of conflict-related sexual violence across 51 countries over the past two decades. Divided into two sections, the report first provides a Global Overview, highlighting the prevalence of sexual violence against women, girls, men, and boys in regions including Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East, while noting the limited data on male victims. It emphasizes the various settings where such violence occurs, homes, fields, detention centers, refugee camps, and during attacks, looting, or while performing daily tasks like collecting food and water. Victims are often subjected to rape, sexual slavery, torture, and humiliation, with women and children frequently abducted by armed groups.

Dara Kay Cohen and Ragnhild Nordås[3], analyze patterns of sexual violence perpetrated by armed groups using data from the Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict (SVAC) dataset. This dataset covers 129 active conflicts and 625 armed actors from 1989 to 2009, capturing six dimensions of sexual violence: prevalence, perpetrators, victims, forms, location, and timing. It allows for a detailed analysis of sexual violence patterns for each conflict actor and includes data on incidents occurring during active conflicts and in the five years post-conflict.

The findings reveal significant variations in the prevalence of sexual violence by perpetrator group, with state militaries more frequently reported as perpetrators than rebel groups or militias. Additionally, sexual violence often persists at high levels into the post-conflict period. The study highlights the importance of this dataset for scholars and policymakers to understand better the causes, patterns, and consequences of sexual violence in armed conflicts, offering valuable insights for prevention and response efforts.

Scope Of the study
The present study aims to examine the extent to which protection is afforded to women by International Law, focusing particularly on International Humanitarian Law, customary law, and International Human Rights Law during conflict situations. It involves an extensive analysis of relevant treaties, resolutions, and declarations from the United Nations and its affiliated agencies. The research encompasses both International Armed Conflicts and Non-International Armed Conflicts, assessing the protection granted to women in their capacities as both civilians and combatants. Additionally, the study highlights the initiatives undertaken by the United Nations, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and other pertinent judicial tribunals in this regard.

Research Methodology
The research methodology for the study will employ a multi-faceted approach, beginning with a comprehensive literature review of existing academic texts, articles, and reports related to International Humanitarian Law and the protection of women. This will be followed by an in-depth legal analysis of relevant treaties, conventions, and customary laws, particularly focusing on the Geneva Conventions and national laws in India. Case studies of specific armed conflicts, such as the ongoing conflict in Syria, will be examined to highlight practical applications and challenges in prosecuting sexual violence.

Additionally, interviews with experts, legal practitioners, and representatives from international organizations will provide insights into the effectiveness of legal protections, while comparative analyses will identify best practices across different countries. Data will be collected from reputable sources, employing both qualitative and quantitative methods to assess the prevalence of sexual violence and the efficacy of existing legal frameworks. This comprehensive methodology aims to contribute valuable insights and recommendations for enhancing protections and accountability mechanisms for women in armed conflict

Legal Frameworks Addressing Sexual Violence

Armed conflicts continue to cause suffering worldwide, with civilians often being the worst affected. To limit violence and regulate warfare, IHL sets clear rules to protect those not involved in fighting. These principles, recognized by the International Court of Justice in cases like the Corfu Channel Case and Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua, are binding in all conflicts, regardless of their cause. IHL applies to both international and civil wars, ensuring accountability for violations and protecting war victims from extreme brutality.

Protection of Victims of Armed Conflicts Under Humanitarian Law

While national laws prohibit individuals from taking up arms against the state, international law operates differently since there is no higher authority above sovereign states to enforce an absolute ban on war. Although war cannot always be prevented, international law sets rules to limit its impact. IHL, also known as the law of war (jus in bello), aims to reduce human suffering during armed conflicts. It regulates warfare by balancing military necessity with humanitarian concerns, ensuring that those not actively involved in fighting are treated with dignity and respect. Though IHL does not clearly define "armed conflict," the term is used in international treaties like the 1949's Geneva Conventions and has been interpreted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to include conflicts between states, as well as prolonged violence within a state involving government forces and organized armed groups.

IHL is divided into two main categories:

• Humanitarian Law in International Armed Conflicts – Covers wars between states.
• Humanitarian Law in Non-International Armed Conflicts – Applies to civil wars and conflicts within a single country.
   

• Humanitarian Law In International Armed Conflicts When it comes to international conflicts, international humanitarian law (IHL) is mainly regulated by:
  • The Conventions of Hague
  • 1949's Four Geneva Conventions and Their Supplementary Protocols
  The goal of both legal systems is to guarantee that humanitarian norms are upheld during times of conflict. But they emphasize distinct elements:
  • The main goal of the Geneva Conventions is to protect civilians, injured soldiers, and prisoners of war from damage and abuse.
  • By outlining the rights and obligations of combatants, imposing behavioural limitations, and outlawing specific weapons and cruel war tactics, the Hague Conventions govern the behaviour of armed forces.
  • Customary international law means that nations who have not formally ratified the accords are nonetheless subject to them.
  Disarmament and war crimes were also covered at the conferences in 1899 and 1907. The establishment of an international court to resolve conflicts and avert war was one of the main proposals. The concept was eventually blocked by Germany and a few other countries, despite the support of major nations including the United States, Britain, Russia, France, China, and Persia. Rather, the Permanent Court of Arbitration was created as a voluntary arbitration body. The Nuremberg International Military Tribunal (NIMT) in 1946 verified that the Hague Conventions' regulations were accepted as established international law by 1939, following World War II. The same opinion was maintained by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East in 1948. Many of the regulations outlined in the Hague Conventions were later confirmed and extended in two Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions in 1977.
   
• Geneva Protocol to Hague Convention The Geneva Protocol is seen as an expansion of the Hague Conventions, despite not having been negotiated in The Hague. It became operative on February 8, 1928, after being signed in 1925. The use of biological and chemical weapons in combat is prohibited by the convention. The deployment of mustard gas and other related chemicals during World War I was one of the atrocities of chemical warfare that prompted its introduction. It was adopted as a result of public outcry and worries about the catastrophic consequences of such weapons in future conflicts. It was later enhanced by:
  • The Biological Weapons Convention (1972), which forbids the creation and accumulation of biological weapons.
  • The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention, which forbids the manufacture, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons.
  It's important to note that the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 apply only to conflicts between nations (International Armed Conflicts, IAC) and do not cover internal conflicts (Non-International Armed Conflicts, NIAC).

Geneva Convention, 1949
In order to overcome the shortcomings of previous treaties in governing armed conflicts, the 1949 Geneva treaties were ratified following World War II. Guidelines for the protection of civilians and prisoners of war (PoWs) were not included in the prior treaties of 1864, 1906, 1929, and 1925, which primarily addressed how soldiers should be treated. Additional protocols that forbid specific forms of combat and deal with civil wars have since been added to the 1949 Conventions, which updated and broadened these provisions. These conventions are recognized by 196 parties and are applicable everywhere. The protection of ill and injured soldiers on land is covered under the First Geneva Convention. It was last updated in 1949 after being adopted in 1864.

Members of the armed forces who are injured, ill, or shipwrecked at sea are also entitled to similar safeguards under the Second Geneva Convention. It replaced the 1907 Hague Convention X and was first ratified in 1949. With the first treaty concentrating on land combat and the second on maritime warfare, both conventions have essentially the same rules for safeguarding people and property.

Depending on whether injured and ill people are civilians or members of the armed forces, different regulations apply under these accords. However, these regulations were consolidated by Protocol I of 1977, which guarantees that all injured and ill people, regardless of their military or civilian status, receive the appropriate medical care without facing any prejudice. Medical personnel cannot be punished for delivering morally sound medical care, and both military and civilian medical units are protected. It is illegal to attack or obstruct medical facilities unless they are being utilized maliciously.[10]

The treatment of prisoners of war is governed by the Third Geneva Convention, which was first ratified in 1929 and updated in 1949. This treaty protects any soldier who is captured by the enemy and is regarded as a prisoner of war. According to the regulations, inmates must get humane treatment, which includes adequate housing, healthcare, and family contact. They must be taken to safer areas if they are apprehended in a fighting zone. Their employment, disciplinary measures, and legal rights are likewise governed by the convention. Prisoners must be released and returned home as soon as hostilities are over. However, mercenaries and spies are not eligible for POW status.

The protection of people during times of conflict is the focus of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. It expands on the 1907 Hague Convention IV. Both occupied regions and war areas are covered under this pact. It forbids forcible relocations of civilians, collective punishment, torture, and violent acts. Medical professionals, women, children, and refugees are provided extra protection. Food supplies, public health, and the humane treatment of civilians must all be guaranteed by the occupying force. It is also forbidden to destroy state or private property in occupied areas unless there is a compelling military reason to do so.
Three more protocols have been added to enhance the Geneva Conventions. Protections for victims of international armed conflicts are strengthened by Protocol I (1977), which guarantees the safety of medical staff and transportation.

Protocol II (1977) extends similar protections to victims of non-international conflicts, such as civil wars. Protocol III (2005) introduced an additional distinctive emblem for humanitarian organizations. Despite these regulations, enforcement remains a challenge. The conventions aim to protect human dignity in times of war, but their effectiveness depends on adherence by warring parties. Violations, such as attacks on civilians and mistreatment of prisoners, still occur in conflicts worldwide, raising concerns about the need for stronger implementation and accountability.[11]

Humanitarian Law In Non-International Armed Conflicts
The initial purpose of the Geneva Conventions was to address international conflicts or battles between nations. However, in 1949, regulations for internal conflicts, wars within a nation, were introduced as a result of the International Committee of the Red Cross's (ICRC) and some countries' efforts. Common Article 3, which covers disputes that occur within a single nation, was used to do this.

What is the function of Common Article 3?
It establishes minimal humanitarian safeguards for war-affected individuals, such as:

• People who are not taking part in the combat.
• Soldiers who have given up or who are unable to fight because they are ill, injured, or in custody.

According to the article, these individuals shall always receive humanitarian treatment, free from prejudice based on money, gender, color, religion, or any other characteristic. Prohibited conduct under Common Article 3:

• Murdering, torturing, or abusing others.
• Capturing captives.
• Unpleasant or humiliating treatment.
• Putting someone to death without a proper trial.

Humanitarian groups like the ICRC are also able to assist people impacted by the article. Crucially, the application of this rule does not alter the warring parties' legal standing; that is, it does not acknowledge rebels as legitimate armies or governments. Common Article 3 was the sole law governing internal disputes, such as civil wars and independence wars, for a long time. But by the 1970s, internal strife had increased, and more robust safeguards were required. As a result, Additional Protocol II was adopted in 1977. Additional Protocol II
Without altering its fundamental ideas, this protocol increased the protections included in Common Article 3. Conflicts between a government and organized rebel organizations that hold a territory well enough to carry out protracted military operations fall under this category. It does not, however, apply to single violent episodes or minor disruptions like rioting. Common Article 3 and Protocol II violations
Many of the regulations found in Protocol II and Common Article 3 are now regarded as customary international law, which means that they are applicable even in cases when a government has not formally accepted them. International courts have the authority to try those who commit grave offenses, including war crimes. Cases from the Yugoslav Wars and the Rwandan Genocide have previously experienced this. War crimes committed in non-international conflicts were added to the International Criminal Court's (ICC) Rome Statute in 1998. Since international human rights law governs how governments treat their citizens, some scholars contend that it is more appropriate for internal conflicts than international humanitarian law. As demonstrated by cases heard by the European Court of Human Rights, using human rights legislation would provide stronger regulations even during conflicts. There are obstacles, too, as humanitarian law extends to all parties and human rights legislation primarily binds governments rather than insurgents. Additionally, humanitarian law is intended for times of conflict, while human rights law is for emergencies and times of peace. The argument about which law should apply to internal issues is still going strong because of these discrepancies. Essential Differences Between Armed Conflicts That Are International And Non-International
One distinctive feature of the law in non-international armed conflicts (NIACs) is that it covers both governments and non-state armed organizations. While governments have always been governed by international law, both states and non-state actors participating in NIACs are expressly bound by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

• Combatant Privilege: As long as they abide by the rules of war, legitimate combatants in an international armed conflict (IAC) are permitted to commit crimes like murdering enemy soldiers. They are, therefore, immune from prosecution for these crimes. Nevertheless, non-state combatants in an NIAC are not granted this "combatant privilege." Because domestic law still applies to them, they can be tried for any hostile conduct, even if they complied with the rules of war, in addition to war crimes.
• Prisoner of War (POW) Status: Under international law, combatants caught in IACs are entitled to POW status, which confers on them specific rights and safeguards. However, because the legislation does not provide them with this status, non-state fighters are not acknowledged as prisoners of war in NIACs. They are, therefore, not afforded the same safeguards as troops who have been captured in IACs.
• Relevant Laws: The Hague Conventions (1899, 1907), the four Geneva Conventions, and Additional Protocol I are among the more general laws that regulate IACs. However, only Additional Protocol II and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions are applicable in NIACs. NIACs are not covered by the Hague Conventions.

Women's Protection In Armed Conflicts
In both international and non-international armed conflicts, women are entitled to special protection under international humanitarian law because they are a component of the civilian population. Protections against violence, especially sexual violence, against women in conflict areas are established by the Geneva Conventions and the International Criminal Court's (ICC) Statute. Protection under the Geneva Conventions:

• Particular protection is needed for women from assaults on their honor, such as forced prostitution, rape, and other sexual violence.
• It is forbidden to use any kind of violence that endangers someone's life, health, or physical or mental well-being. Torture, brutal treatment, demeaning and humiliating actions, forced prostitution, and threats of such violence are all included in this.
• Women need to be given additional care and shielded against sexual abuse, such as forced prostitution, rape, and indecent assault.

Non-International Armed Conflicts (NIACs):

• It is expressly forbidden to engage in any behaviour that compromises someone's dignity, including demeaning and humiliating treatment.
• It is prohibited to use violence (hors de combat) against people who are no longer engaged in a fight. This covers practices including slavery, forced prostitution, rape, torture, cruel treatment, and indecent assault.

Protection According to the International Criminal Court's (ICC) Statute:

• Crimes against humanity include forced pregnancy, forced sterilization, forced prostitution, rape, and sexual slavery when they are carried out as a component of a large-scale or coordinated assault against civilians.
• Both IACs and NIACs classify these same acts, along with humiliating and degrading treatment, as war crimes if they are committed on a wide scale or as part of a planned strategy.

Conclusion
International rules have been created to protect victims and hold offenders accountable, yet sexual violence in armed situations is still a severe problem. Humane treatment of civilians, detainees, and injured people is guaranteed by the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, which establish guidelines to reduce suffering in both internal and international conflicts.

Even if there are regulations, they are difficult to enforce, particularly when rebel groups are engaging in non-international conflicts. International law, which forbids sexual violence, forced prostitution, and other abuses, provides specific protection for women in particular. When committed in a systematic manner, these crimes are recognized by the ICC as war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Despite these protections, violations continue to happen, showing the need for stronger enforcement and accountability. More efforts are needed to ensure these laws are followed and that victims receive justice.

Bibliography
Books

• Alan Doss, United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) (Joachim A. Koops et al. eds., 2014), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199686049.013.71.
• Dieter Fleck, The Handbook of Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflicts (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995).
• Dr. Gurdip Singh, International Law (Eastern Book Company, Indian, 4th edn., 2024).
• Génération MLF, 1968-2008 (Mouvement de libération des femmes (Fr.) ed., 2008).
• Gerd Oberleinter, Human Rights in Armed Conflicts (Cambridge University Press, 2015).
• International Court, Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2021).
• Megan Bastick, Karin Grimm, and Rahel Kunz, Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict, Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), 2007.
• Women, peace and security: Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) (United Nations Security Council ed., 2002).
• "The WPS Agenda and UN Mediation" in The Politics of Women, Peace, and Security in UN Mediation 32 (2025), https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009512251.002.

Articles/Papers

• Ali Bitenga Alexandre, Kitoka Moke Mutondo, Juvenal Bazilashe Balegamire, Amini Emile, and Denis Mukwege, "Motivations for Sexual Violence in Armed Conflicts: Voices from Combatants in Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo," Vol. 37, Issue 1 (2021).
• Armed Conflicts, "Sexual Violence and the Mens Rea of the War Crime of Terrorism" in International Law and Sexual Violence in Armed Conflicts 179 (2012), https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004227224_008.
• B. Tuzmukhamedov, "Classification of armed conflicts in international law: definitions and reality" 1 Pathways to Peace & Sec. 44 (2018), https://doi.org/10.20542/2307-1494-2018-1-44-53.
• C. Fowmina & C. Rabbiraj, "Sexual violence against women during non-international armed conflicts" 1 Int'l J. Pub. L. & Pol'y 1 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1504/ijplap.2022.10047162.
• Carlo Koos, "What Do We Know About Sexual Violence in Armed Conflicts? Recent Empirical Progress and Remaining Gaps in Peace and Conflict Research," GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies, 2015.
• Cheah Wui Ling, "Walking the Long Road in Solidarity and Hope: A Case Study of the 'Comfort Women' Movement's Deployment of Human Rights Discourse" 22 Harv. Hum. Rts. J. (2008).

End Notes:

1. Gloria Gaggioli, "Sexual Violence in Armed Conflicts: A Violation of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights Law," Int'l Rev. Red Cross, Vol. 96, No. 894, pp. 1-36 (May 2015).
2. Megan Bastick, Karin Grimm, and Rahel Kunz, Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict, Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), 2007.
3. Dara Kay Cohen and Ragnhild Nordås, "Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict: Introducing the SVAC Dataset, 1989–2009," J. Peace Res., Vol. 51, No. 3 (2014).
4. United Kingdom v. Albania (ICJ 9 April, 1949)
5. Dr. Gurdip Singh, International Law (Eastern Book Company, Indian, 4th edn., 2024).
6. Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. It-94-1
7. The Hague Convention 1907, art. 4
8. The Charter and Judgment of the Nürnberg Tribunal – History and Analysis: Memorandum Submitted by the Secretary-General, UN Doc A/Cn.4/5.
9. Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. It-94-1
10. Dr. Nwanolue B.O.G, Victor Chidubem, et.al., "Legal Protection of War Victims in International and Non-International Armed Hostilities: A Scholarly Exposition into the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Two Additional Protocols of 1977" Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization (The International Institute for Science, Technology and Education, 2012).
11. Dieter Fleck, The Handbook of Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflicts (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995).
12. Nwanolue, Victor Chidubem Iwuoha, et.al., "Legal Protection of War Victims in International and Non-International Armed Hostilities: A Scholarly Exposition into the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Two Additional Protocols of 1977" 3 Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization (2012).
13. William Abresch, "A Human Rights Law of Internal Armed Conflict: The European Court of Human Rights in Chechnya" European Journal of International Law (2005).
14. Gerd Oberleinter, Human Rights in Armed Conflicts (Cambridge University Press, 2015).
15. Geneva Convention, art. 27
16. Geneva Convention, art. 75 2(a)
17. Id.
18. Geneva Convention, Common art. 3
19. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 1998, art. 7(1)(g).

Written By:

• Anushka Singh, Amity University, Noida
• Dr.Sneha Tiwari, Amity University, Noida