b. Non-International Armed Conflict

Internal or Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)

Under Additional Protocol II, the covered non-international armed conflicts take place in the territory of a High Contracting Party between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement this Protocol. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions also covers non-international armed conflicts between organized armed groups that do not meet Additional Protocol II’s narrower requirements.

It does not include situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and other acts of a similar nature, as not being armed conflicts. [Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (AP II)], art. 1].

Internal or Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)

Under Additional Protocol II, these are armed conflicts that take place in the territory of a High Contracting Party between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement this Protocol. Common Article 3 also covers non-international armed conflicts that do not meet these narrower requirements, including conflicts solely between organized armed groups.

It does not include situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and other acts of a similar nature, as not being armed conflicts. [Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (AP II)], art. 1].

Difference of AP II, art. 1 and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions

A NIAC within the meaning of common Article 3 does not necessarily have to involve a government; it can also take place entirely between organized armed groups, a scenario that is particularly relevant in areas of weak governance, such as so-called “failed States.”

In order for a non-State armed group to be considered a “party” to a conflict, common Article 3 does not require any recognition of belligerency by the opposing State, nor popular support, territorial control or political motivation. (Intro to IHL, p. 68)

Difference of AP II, art. 1 and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions

A NIAC within the meaning of common Article 3 does not necessarily have to involve a government; it can also take place entirely between organized armed groups, a scenario that is particularly relevant in areas of weak governance, such as so-called “failed States.”

In order for a non-State armed group to be considered a “party” to a conflict, common Article 3 does not require any recognition of belligerency by the opposing State, nor popular support, territorial control or political motivation. (Intro to IHL, p. 68)

Requisites of an NIAC:

• Protracted armed violence
• Such armed violence is between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within a State. (Prosecutor v. Tadić Trial Decision, ¶561, May 7, 1997)

Requisites of an NIAC:

• Protracted armed violence
• Such armed violence is between governmental authorities and organized armed groups or between such groups within a State. (Prosecutor v. Tadić Trial Decision, ¶561, May 7, 1997)

Threshold of Protracted Armed Violence

A criterion that in practice has been interpreted as referring more to the intensity of the armed violence than to its duration.

Indicative factors for assessing “intensity” have included: “the number, duration and intensity of individual confrontations; the type of weapons and other military equipment used; the number and caliber of munitions fired; the number of persons and type of forces partaking in the fighting; the number of casualties; the extent of material destruction; and the number of civilians fleeing combat zones. (Intro to IHL, p.70)

Threshold of Protracted Armed Violence

A criterion that in practice has been interpreted as referring more to the intensity of the armed violence than to its duration.

Indicative factors for assessing “intensity” have included: “the number, duration and intensity of individual confrontations; the type of weapons and other military equipment used; the number and caliber of munitions fired; the number of persons and type of forces partaking in the fighting; the number of casualties; the extent of material destruction; and the number of civilians fleeing combat zones. (Intro to IHL, p.70)

Organized Armed Group

The armed wing of a non-state party to a non- international armed conflict, and may be comprised of either:

• dissident armed forces (for example, breakaway parts of state armed forces); or
• other organized armed groups which recruit their members primarily from the civilian population but have developed a sufficient degree of military organization to conduct hostilities on behalf of a party to the conflict.

The term organized armed group refers exclusively to the armed or military wing of a non-state party to a non-international armed conflict. It does not include those segments of the civilian population that are supportive of the non-state party such as its political wing. (ICRC)

The level of organization of non-State armed groups has in practice been assessed based on a series of indicative factors including elements such as: “the existence of a command structure and disciplinary rules and mechanisms within the group; the existence of a headquarters; the fact that the group controls a certain territory; the ability of the group to gain access to weapons, other military equipment, recruits and military training; its ability to plan, coordinate and carry out military operations, including troop movements and logistics; its ability to define a unified military strategy and use military tactics; and its ability to speak with one voice and negotiate and conclude agreements such as cease- fire or peace accords. (ICRC, Intro to IHL, p.69) Additional Protocol II, Article 1(1), separately requires organized armed groups to be under responsible command and to exercise control over part of a State’s territory sufficient to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement the Protocol.

Organized Armed Group

The armed wing of a non-state party to a non- international armed conflict, and may be comprised of either:

• dissident armed forces (for example, breakaway parts of state armed forces); or
• other organized armed groups which recruit their members primarily from the civilian population but have developed a sufficient degree of military organization to conduct hostilities on behalf of a party to the conflict.

The term organized armed group refers exclusively to the armed or military wing of a non-state party to a non-international armed conflict. It does not include those segments of the civilian population that are supportive of the non-state party such as its political wing. (ICRC)

The level of organization of non-State armed groups has in practice been assessed based on a series of indicative factors including elements such as: “the existence of a command structure and disciplinary rules and mechanisms within the group; the existence of a headquarters; the fact that the group controls a certain territory; the ability of the group to gain access to weapons, other military equipment, recruits and military training; its ability to plan, coordinate and carry out military operations, including troop movements and logistics; its ability to define a unified military strategy and use military tactics; and its ability to speak with one voice and negotiate and conclude agreements such as cease- fire or peace accords. (ICRC, Intro to IHL, p.69)

Separately, Additional Protocol II, Article 1(1) applies to armed conflicts between a State’s armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups that, under responsible command, exercise such control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement the Protocol. [Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (AP II), art. 1(1)]