Since time immemorial, civilians have been victims of terrorist acts. Ordinary people traveling to work on the bus or sitting in a summer cafe are ordinary victims of indiscriminate violence: not famous figures of national or international scale, but ordinary passers-by. However, it happens that as a result of a terrorist act, a blow is inflicted on persons who are at the center of everyone’s attention: government officials and opposition leaders. The use of such means as unrestrained and indiscriminate violence has always been considered contrary to the fundamental norms of the law of war. Both are enshrined in international treaties protecting a person and codified in domestic legislation, particularly in criminal law.
The 70s of the twentieth century were marked by a huge number of terrorist acts directed against civilians, most notably related to the conflict between the peoples of Israel and Palestine. It was a time when the issue of terrorism in general and the international community’s reaction to such events were put on the agenda of the United Nations and international governmental organizations. The issue was discussed both among scientists and in the media. Moreover, terrorism, under the names “war for national liberation” and “guerrilla war”, became the main issue of the Diplomatic Conference (Englund, 2019). It led to the adoption on June 8, 1977, of two Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949.
The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols form the center of international humanitarian law, a branch of international law that regulates the conduct of armed conflicts. In particular, they defend people who do not engage in combat or those who have discontinued participation in warfare, for example, injured, sick and shipwrecked soldiers. Terrorism is a social phenomenon with many aspects, which may differ depending on the situation. Experts in the field of international law and representatives of Governments have yet to come to a single comprehensive and acceptable definition for all. “Criminal acts directed against the State or intended to cause a sense of fear in individuals, groups of individuals or the population as a whole” (Englund, 2019, 391). It is the only definition available can be found in the text of the 1937 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism.
International rules have distinguished between methods and means of warfare that are legal and methods and means of warfare that are illegal. For example, the use of chemical weapons or the killing of civilians who do not take part in hostilities. Resorting to illegal methods means violating the legal order. Officers and soldiers can be prosecuted at the national or international level and punished for terrorist acts if it is established that they committed them. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Additional Protocols to them of 1977 only mention acts of terrorism specifically twice (Frías, 2020). Article 33 IV of the Geneva Convention and Article 51, part 2, of Protocol I. Under the heading “Protection of the civilian population”, Article 51 of Protocol I codifies the basic norms that must be observed during hostilities.
In conclusion, terrorism is a crime, the main purpose of which is a violation of public safety, expressed in encroachment on the life and health of citizens, critical infrastructure facilities, public administration bodies, and the state. International humanitarian law regulates armed conflict. Thus, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 relate to terrorist acts insofar as they take place in conditions of armed conflict or, to put it simply, during the war.
References
Englund, S. H. (2019). A dangerous middle-ground: terrorists, counter-terrorists, and gray-zone conflict. Global Affairs, 5(4-5), 389-404. Web.
Frías, A. S. (2020). Bringing Terrorists to Justice in the Context of Armed Conflict: Interaction between International Humanitarian Law and the UN Conventions Against Terrorism. Israel Law Review, 53(1), 71-99. Web.