Hesamoddin Lesani; Ahmad Kazemi
Abstract
In spite of the development of the protection of civilians, prisoners of war and even foreigners in armed conflicts, particularly in twentieth century, such an improvement in legal systems, except in the Islamic law, is not observed in respect of the obligation of states to support their own soldiers ...
Read More
In spite of the development of the protection of civilians, prisoners of war and even foreigners in armed conflicts, particularly in twentieth century, such an improvement in legal systems, except in the Islamic law, is not observed in respect of the obligation of states to support their own soldiers and forces. The Quadruple Geneva Conventions and its Additional protocols are important legal steps to protect civilians and prisoners, but similar steps have not been taken to address the obligation of states for protection of their own troops in legal systems. Some states even consider the soldiers as a property with whom any treatment is allowed. The emergence of such changes as happened in the Persian Gulf Syndrome as well as the Sexual Assaults crisis in the US military, especially during the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq, have made a focus on the obligation of states to protect their own forces. Due to the lack of international documents on the obligation of governments to protect their own soldiers, theoretically, it seems that some legal principles could be extracted from International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, particularly, on the basis of customary rights and at the top of them, principles of the right to life and human dignity. The provisions of the Geneva Conventions, its Additional protocols and more than 20 out of 161 customary principles codified by the International Committee of Red Cross, provide indirect guidelines on the obligation of states to protect their own soldiers .