Many of the cases handled by the International Court of Justice have to do with
disputes over territory.
POWs (prisoners of war) seeking pardons.
international boundary disputes.
abuses of the Human Rights Declaration.
Answers
Answer:
In the past 20 years, Governments, rebels, politicians, diplomats, activists,
demonstrators and journalists have referred to international humanitarian
law and human rights in armed conflicts. They are regularly referred to
in United Nations Security Council resolutions, in United Nations Human
Rights Council discussions, in political pamphlets of opposition movements,
in reports of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), in the training of
soldiers and in diplomatic discussions. International human rights law and
international humanitarian law are now important parameters for many
military commanders, advised on the ground by lawyers. Finally, they
are often referred to by defence lawyers and prosecutors in international
and—to a still limited extent—domestic tribunals, and form the basis for
well-reasoned verdicts.
International human rights law and international humanitarian law share
the goal of preserving the dignity and humanity of all. Over the years, the
General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and, more recently,
the Human Rights Council have considered that, in armed conflict, parties
to the conflict have legally binding obligations concerning the rights of
persons affected by the conflict. Although different in scope, international
human rights law and international humanitarian law offer a series of
protections to persons in armed conflict, whether civilians, persons who
are no longer participating directly in hostilities or active participants in the
conflict. Indeed, as has been recognized, inter alia, by international and
regional courts, as well as by United Nations organs, treaty bodies and
human rights special procedures, both bodies of law apply to situations
of armed conflict and provide complementary and mutually reinforcing protection