The extent to which States have legal responsibilities under international humanitarian law in relation to the conduct of others has long been contested. Under general international law, the law on State responsibility does set out certain circumstances in which States have negative and positive obligations arising from others’ wrongful conduct, yet these are heavily restricted.

In this post – part of a joint blog symposium with Opinio Juris exploring the ICRC Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII Commentary) – Lawrence Hill-Cawthorne, an Associate Professor in Public International Law at the University of Reading, considers the relationship between the ICRC’s interpretation of common Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions and the general rules on State responsibility. He shows that the ICRC’s approach is grounded in, yet expands in important respects, the general international law rules that place obligations on States in relation to the wrongful conduct of others.

While ratification of the Geneva Conventions is a relatively recent phenomenon, warfare has always been subject to certain principles and customs. Two thirds of today’s armed conflicts are taking place in Muslim contexts, wherein some arms carriers cite Islamic law as a reference.

In this post – part of a joint blog symposium with Opinio Juris exploring the ICRC Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII Commentary) – Ahmed Al-Dawoody, ICRC’s legal advisor on Islamic law, examines the religious texts for insight on the treatment of prisoners of war.

While ratification of the Geneva Conventions is a relatively recent phenomenon, warfare has always been subject to certain principles and customs. International humanitarian law has its roots in the rules of ancient civilizations and religions, and the teachings of Buddhism are highly relevant in this regard.

In this post – celebrating the launch of the new ICRC Religion and Humanitarian Principles website and part of a joint blog symposium with Opinio Juris exploring the ICRC Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII Commentary) – three eminent Buddhist scholars examine religious texts for insight on the treatment of prisoners of war.

Misinformation is on the rise, and the humanitarian sector has not escaped the consequences. The misinformation environment not only sustains itself in a vicious cycle, but also increases data protection challenges and disrupts humanitarian protection and assistance work.

In this post, Rachel Xu from the Yale Jackson Institute for Global Affairs overviews some key characteristics of a fertile misinformation environment, the challenges these pose for data protection, and the implications of misinformation for humanitarian operations.

In generalizing groups as homogeneously ‘vulnerable’, we risk closing our eyes to existing spheres of power, diversity and capacity that exist among populations affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence. By going beyond broad monolithic categorizations and instead accounting for the specific needs, risks and capacities of affected people through an intersectional framework, we can tailor our humanitarian activities and include affected populations as active agents with dimensions beyond their vulnerability.

In this post, Ahmed Al-Dawoody, the legal adviser for Islamic law and jurisprudence at the ICRC, and Saman Rejali, Thematic Editor at the International Review of the Red Cross, explore intersectionality between gender and Islam, drawing on the works of prominent Islamic female scholars and leaders to profile how Muslim women affected by conflict go beyond the mould of ‘vulnerable women’ and exercise power and agency over their lives.

While a woman’s experience in a prisoners of war (POW) camp may not differ drastically from men in all cases, the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII) operates to ensure equal treatment in a number of ways where experiences do diverge.

In this post – part of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, as well as the ‘GCIII Commentary’ blog series marking the ICRC’s updated Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention – ICRC legal advisors Heleen Hiemstra and Vanessa Murphy outline GCIII’s relevance for captured women in 21st century international armed conflicts.

While disability inequalities have long been observed, the global COVID-19 crisis has deepened and exposed the problem of exclusion, which renders work on disability inclusion urgent and imperative. As such, the theme for this year’s International Day of Persons with Disabilities is “Building Back Better: toward a disability-inclusive, accessible and sustainable post COVID-19 World”.

In this post – marking the International Day and as part of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence – ICRC’s Disability Inclusion Advisor NG’AA Michael Mwendwa examines how the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated cases of sexual violence among persons with disabilities and proposes possible solutions to these challenges for people living in armed conflict by introducing the ICRC’s Vision 2030 on Disability.

Three months into the pandemic, the ICRC’s Head of Addressing Sexual Violence published a call to humanitarian agencies to urgently address the risk of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) rising in the shadow of COVID-19. She called on ICRC and others to bolster efforts to ensure continued service delivery for survivors of sexual violence.

It is now clear that the COVID-19 pandemic has enabled two opposing trends: new sexual violence in places affected by conflict and violence, and fewer services available for victims and survivors. Marking the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the start of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, ICRC’s Addressing Sexual Violence Advisor, May Maloney, outlines the challenges and how international humanitarian law (IHL) can help address them.

IHL in action: seven patterns of respect by ICRC Law and Policy

Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare workers in conflict zones and peaceful countries alike have faced countless challenges, including shortages of protective equipment and insufficient protocol to treat the new virus. Some doctors, nurses, ambulance drivers and other healthcare professionals have experienced stigmatization within their own communities, triggered by an intense anguish and an often-disproportionate fear of infection. As a result, not only are those affected by COVID-19 blamed as ‘plague spreaders’, but the healthcare staff providing for them also face discrimination.

In this post, ICRC Health Care in Danger delegate Paola Forgione reflects on the role that society plays in either supporting or stigmatizing people affected by the virus and healthcare workers, based on her professional research as well as her own personal and recent experience as a COVID-19 patient.