Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Legal Protection of Personnel of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations in Times of NIAC

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
International Humanitarian Law and Non-State Actors

  • 1307 Accesses

Abstract

United Nations peacekeeping operations have increasingly been deployed to situations of armed conflict and have frequently been targeted by parties to the conflict. Against this backdrop, the legal protection for personnel of United Nations peacekeeping operations in times of armed conflict has been developed particularly since the 1990s. International humanitarian law and the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel are now the principal sources of legal protection for personnel of United Nations peacekeeping operations in times of armed conflict. However, they pose difficulties of a different nature in determining when those personnel are protected and when they are not, particularly when such personnel are engaged in hostilities in situations of non-international armed conflict. This chapter explores these issues in detail and concludes that the practice has not sufficiently evolved to resolve them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    American Society of International Law 1952; Bowett 1964; Seyersted 1966; Institute of International Law 1971 and 1975; Sandoz 1978; Schindler 1984.

  2. 2.

    Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of August 12, 1949, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 31, entered into force 21 October 1950; Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea of August 12, 1949, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 85, entered into force 21 October 1950; Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 135, entered into force 21 October 1950; Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War of August 12, 1949, opened for signature 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287, entered into force 21 October 1950.

  3. 3.

    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, opened for signature 12 December 1977, 1125 UNTS 3, entered into force 7 December 1978 (Additional Protocol I); Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, opened for signature 12 December 1977, 1125 UNTS 609, entered into force 7 December 1978 (Additional Protocol II).

  4. 4.

    ICRC 1999, pp 22 and 23.

  5. 5.

    See e.g., UN Secretary-General 1992, paras 66–68, and UN Secretary-General 1993; UN Security Council 1993. See also Bloom 1995; Bourloyannis-Vrailas 1995a, 2000; Bouvier 1995; Kindred 1995; Kirsch 1995; Arsanjani 1996; Greenwood 1996; Maybee 2002; Engdahl 2005; Fleck 2006; Llewellyn 2006; Sassòli 2008; Doria 2009; Bangura 2010; Gadler 2010; Engdahl 2012; Pacholska 2015.

  6. 6.

    UN General Assembly 1993b.

  7. 7.

    UN General Assembly 1994b; Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, opened for signature 15 December 1994, 2051 UNTS 363, entered into force 15 January 1999 (Safety Convention).

  8. 8.

    UN General Assembly 1994a.

  9. 9.

    Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, opened for signature 17 July 1998, 2187 UNTS 3, entered into force 1 July 2002 (ICC Statute).

  10. 10.

    UN Security Council 1999.

  11. 11.

    African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation un Darfur (UNAMID), United Nations Mission in the Central African Republic and Chad (MINURCAT), United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS), United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS), United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), United Nations Mission of Support in East Timor (UNMISET), United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA), United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA), United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire (UNOCI), United Nations Operation in Burundi (ONUB), United Nations Organization Interim Security Force for Abyei (UNISFA), United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC) and United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET).

  12. 12.

    See UN Security Council 2013a, para 12(b); UN Security Council 2014a, para 4(b); UN Security Council 2015a, para 9(e); UN Security Council 2016a, para 35(i)(d).

  13. 13.

    For the definition of the term ‘non-international armed conflict’, see generally, ICRC 2008.

  14. 14.

    For the definition of the term ‘international armed conflict’, see ICRC 2008.

  15. 15.

    See generally, Bowett 1964; Seyersted 1966; Schindler 1984; Palwankar 1993; Greenwood 1998; Shraga 1998; Faite and Grenier 2004; Kolb 2005; Zwanenburg 2005; Ferraro 2013.

  16. 16.

    See, for example, Bouvier 1995, p 652; Kirsch 1995, p 105; Greenwood 1998, pp 22–28; Kolb 2003, p 67; Zwanenburg 2005, pp 182–186; Sassòli 2008, p 104; Vité 2009, pp 19–20; Garraway 2010, pp 132–133; Kleffner 2010, p 58; ICRC 2011, pp 10 and 31; David 2013, pp 664–665; Ferraro 2013, pp 596–597; Sheeran and Case 2014, pp 6–7; Clapham 2015, pp 8–9; Moir 2015, pp 399–400; ICRC 2016, paras 411–413.

  17. 17.

    See, for example, Security Council resolution 2149 (2014) of 10 April 2014 which established the latest United Nations peacekeeping operation, MINUSCA. UN Security Council 2014b, para 20.

  18. 18.

    See, for example, UN Security Council 2015b, paras 31 and 32(a)(i); UN Security Council 2016a, paras 34 and 35(i)(a); UN Security Council 2016b, paras 17 and 19(c).

  19. 19.

    See, for example, UN Security Council 2015b, paras 31 and 32(d); UN Security Council 2016a, paras 34 and 35(iv); UN Security Council 2016b, paras 17 and 19(e); UN Security Council 2016c, para 10.

  20. 20.

    See, for example, UN Security Council 2015b, paras 31 and 32(b)(viii).

  21. 21.

    See, for example, UN Security Council 2016b, paras 17 and 19(g).

  22. 22.

    See, for example, UN Security Council 2016b, paras 17 and 19(c)(ii) and (d).

  23. 23.

    See, for example, UN Security Council 2008, paras 3(g) and 5; UN Security Council 2016b, paras 17 and 19(a)(ii), (c)(ii) and (g).

  24. 24.

    UN Security Council 2013a, para 12(b); UN Security Council 2014a, para 4(b); UN Security Council 2015a, para 9(e); UN Security Council 2016a, paras 34 and 35(i)(d).

  25. 25.

    See, for example, in the context of MONUC and MONUSCO, UN Secretary-General 2004, para 23; UN Secretary-General 2009a, paras 11, 15, 20; UN Secretary-General 2009b, para 15; UN Secretary-General 2009c, paras 9, 19; UN Secretary-General 2009d, paras 5, 11; UN Secretary-General 2010a, paras 8, 10; UN Secretary-General 2010b, paras 10, 19, 21, 22; UN Secretary-General 2011c, paras 14, 20; UN Secretary-General 2012, paras 19, 26; UN Secretary-General 2013a, paras 15, 20; UN Secretary-General 2014a, paras 19, 21, 23, 39; UN Secretary-General 2015a, paras 36, 38; UN Secretary-General 2016, paras 24, 31, 37, 38. See also, in the context of MINUSMA, UN Secretary-General 2014b, para 51; UN Secretary-General 2015b, para 25; UN Secretary-General 2015c, para 22.

  26. 26.

    See, for example, UN Secretary-General 2011a, paras 7, 16; UN Secretary-General 2011b; UN Secretary-General 2011c, para 20; UN Secretary-General 2011d, paras 5, 6, 8; UN Secretary-General 2011e, para 18; UN Secretary-General 2012, para 26; UN Secretary-General 2015b, paras 18, 26.

  27. 27.

    ICRC 1999, pp 22 and 23.

  28. 28.

    ICRC 2016, para 545.

  29. 29.

    Ibid., paras 521–523; Kleffner 2015, p 436.

  30. 30.

    ICRC 2016, para 736; Kleffner 2015, p 445.

  31. 31.

    Sandoz 1987, paras 4520, 4564, 4567, 4599, 4642.

  32. 32.

    Bourloyannis-Vrailas 1995a, p 104; Greenwood 1996, pp 191–192; Greenwood 1998, p 31; Doria 2009, p 65; Shraga 2009, p 361; Gadler 2010, pp 589–590.

  33. 33.

    ICTR, Prosecutor v Bagosora et al., Trial Judgment, 18 December 2008, Case No. ICTR-98-41-T, para 783.

  34. 34.

    Ibid., para 789.

  35. 35.

    Ibid., para 2239.

  36. 36.

    Ibid., para 2240.

  37. 37.

    Ibid., paras 2245, 2258. The Appeals Chamber later found that Bagosora was not responsible for the deaths of the four Belgian military personnel who were killed before his arrival at the scene, but was still responsible for the deaths of the other six Belgian military personnel. ICTR, Bagosora and Nsengiyumva v Prosecutor, Appeals Judgment, 14 December 2011, Case No. ICTR-98-41-A, paras 634 and 742.

  38. 38.

    ICTR, Prosecutor v Ndindiliyimana et al., Trial Judgment, 17 May 2011, Case No. ICTR-00-56-T, paras 2140 and 2146.

  39. 39.

    Ibid., paras 2149, 2154, 2156, 2162. The Appeals Chamber later reversed the findings of the Trial Chamber with respect to Nzuwonemeye and parts of the findings with respect to Sagahutu. ICTR, Ndindiliyimana et al. v Prosecutor, Appeals Judgment, 11 February 2014, Case No. ICTR-00-56-A, para 449.

  40. 40.

    ICTY, Prosecutor v Karadžić, Trial Judgment, 24 March 2016, Case No. IT-95-5/18-T, para 5852.

  41. 41.

    Ibid., para 5943.

  42. 42.

    Ibid., para 6071.

  43. 43.

    While the focus of this chapter is on NIACs, Article 37(1)(d) of 1977 Additional Protocol I, which only applies in IACs, prohibits the killing, injuring or capturing of an adversary by feigning protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations, and Article 38(2) prohibits the use of the distinctive emblem of the United Nations, except as authorized by the United Nations. These provisions do not directly provide legal protection for personnel of United Nations peacekeeping operations. However, as far as Article 37(1)(d) is concerned, Committee III of the Diplomatic Conference at which Protocol I was negotiated stated that ‘the misuse of United Nations signs, emblems or uniforms would be perfidious in cases where the United Nations and its personnel enjoyed a neutral protected status, but not, of course in situations where the United Nations forces were involved as combatants in a conflict.’ Thus, the protected status of United Nations personnel was already recognized at the time, and it was also recognized that such protected status could be lost when United Nations forces were involved as combatants in a conflict. See Switzerland 1978, Vol. 15, at 382.

  44. 44.

    Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone on the Establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone (with Statute), opened for signature 16 January 2002, 2178 UNTS 137, entered into force 12 April 2002.

  45. 45.

    UNTAET 2000.

  46. 46.

    Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, p 112.

  47. 47.

    See e.g., UN Security Council 1994, para 204; Bourloyannis-Vrailas 2000, p 363; UN Secretary-General 2000a, para 16; Bothe 2002, p 411; Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, p 112; Faite 2007, p 156; Special Court for Sierra Leone, Prosecutor v Sesay et al., Trial Judgment, 2 March 2009, Case No. SCSL-04-15-T (Sesay et al. Trial, 2009), paras 215 and 218; Ferraro 2013, p 570.

  48. 48.

    Ibid.

  49. 49.

    Sesay et al., Trial, 2009, above n. 47, para 1937; Special Court for Sierra Leone, Prosecutor v Sesay et al., Appeals Judgment, 26 October 2009, Case No. SCSL-04-15-A (Sesay et al., Appeals, 2009), para 531; ICC, Prosecutor v Abu Garda, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 8 February 2010, Case No. ICC-02/05-02/09 (Abu Garda 2010), para 132; ICC, Prosecutor v Banda and Jerbo, Corrigendum of the ‘Decision on the Confirmation of Charges’, 7 March 2011, ICC-02/05-03/09 (Banda and Jerbo 2011), para 76; Bothe 2002, p 411; Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, p 112; Faite 2007, p 156; Cottier 2008, p 334; Ferraro 2013, p 570.

  50. 50.

    Henckaerts and Doswald-Beck 2005, p 19.

  51. 51.

    ICRC 2009.

  52. 52.

    Ibid., p 65.

  53. 53.

    This also appears to be the approach taken in the Secretary-General’s Bulletin on the observance by United Nations forces of international humanitarian law. UN Secretary-General 1999, para 1.1.

  54. 54.

    Sesay et al., Trial, 2009, above n. 47, paras 1890, 1892, 1895, 1899 and 1900.

  55. 55.

    Ibid., paras 1830, 1843 and 1859.

  56. 56.

    Ibid., para 233.

  57. 57.

    Ibid.

  58. 58.

    Ibid., para 1937.

  59. 59.

    Ibid., paras 680, 683 and 686.

  60. 60.

    Sesay et al., Appeals, 2009, above n. 49, para 529.

  61. 61.

    Ibid., para 531.

  62. 62.

    Abu Garda 2010, above n. 49. The Pre-Trial Chamber declined to confirm the charges against Abu Garda. Therefore, there are no pending proceedings with respect to this case.

  63. 63.

    Banda and Jerbo 2011, above n. 49. The Pre-Trial Chamber confirmed the charges against Banda and Jerbo, thereby clearing the way to trial proceedings. It is noted that Pre-Trial Chamber II of the ICC also authorized investigation into alleged attacks against the personnel of UNOCI. ICC, Situation in the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, Decision on the authorisation of an investigation into the situation in the Republic of Côte d’Ivoire, 3 October 2011, ICC-02/11 (Situation in Côte d’Ivoire). However, no charges concerning the crime of attacking personnel of a peacekeeping mission have been filed. ICC, Prosecutor v Gbagbo, Decision on the confirmation of charges against Laurent Gbagbo, 12 June 2014, ICC-02/11-01/11 and Prosecutor v Blé Goudé, Decision on the confirmation of charges against Blé Goudé, 11 December 2014, ICC-02/11-02-11.

  64. 64.

    Abu Garda 2010, above n. 49, para 83.

  65. 65.

    Banda and Jerbo 2011, above n. 49, para 75.

  66. 66.

    Abu Garda 2010, above n. 49, para 131.

  67. 67.

    Ibid., para 132; Banda and Jerbo 2011, above n. 49, para 76.

  68. 68.

    See, for example, UN Secretary-General 2004, paras 23 and 24; Secretary-General 2005, paras 21, 22, 32, 33, 34.

  69. 69.

    Above n. 25, in particular regarding MINUSMA.

  70. 70.

    See, for example, ICRC 2015, p 25. Since 2009, the United Nations Support Office to the African Union Mission in Somalia (UNSOA) and its successor, the United Nations Support Office in Somalia (UNSOS), which are largely composed of civilian personnel, have provided logistical support to the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM), which has been engaged in an armed conflict with armed groups in Somalia. However, it is unlikely that the support provided by civilian personnel of UNSOS to AMISOM amounts to a direct participation in hostilities as the support is limited mainly to the provision of materials and services, such as rations, fuel, water, accommodation and infrastructure, maintenance services, armoured personnel carriers, engineering equipment, medical support, aviation, strategic communications explosive hazard management capacities and strategic personnel and equipment movements. See UN Security Council 2015c, para 2(a). Such support does not appear to fall within the ICRC’s standard that a civilian is taking a direct part in hostilities when he or she is acting in support of a party to the conflict and carrying out acts which may adversely affect the military operations or military capacity of the enemy, or which may inflict death, injury or destruction on persons or objects protected against direct attack. See ICRC 2009.

  71. 71.

    See, for example, Glick 1995, p 106; Gadler 2010, p 598; Engdahl 2012, pp 278–279; Ferraro 2013, p 600; Fleck 2013, p 625; Sheeran and Case 2014, p 7; ICRC 2015, p 25; Pacholska 2015, p 68.

  72. 72.

    See, for example, Ferraro 2013, p 605. Another author draws an analogy between a UN peacekeeping operation and a non-State armed group (instead of armed forces of a State). This author recalls that, when an armed group becomes a party to an armed conflict, the ICRC considers that their members with a ‘continuous combat function’ are not entitled to the protection from direct attacks. Following this approach, this author argues that members of a UN peacekeeping operation with a ‘continuous combat function’ lose the protection from direct attacks, while other members of the operation are protected. Pacholska 2015, pp 57 and 69. See also Sheeran and Case 2014, p 10.

  73. 73.

    Engdahl 2012, pp 278–279; Ferraro 2013, pp 606–607; ICRC 2015, p 25.

  74. 74.

    ICRC 2009, p 46.

  75. 75.

    ICTY, Prosecutor v Tadic Case, Jurisdiction, Appeals, 2 October 1995, Case No. IT-94-1, para 70.

  76. 76.

    Sesay et al., Trial, 2009, above n. 47, paras 1830, 1843 and 1859.

  77. 77.

    Ibid., para 1937.

  78. 78.

    An argument has also been made that such support to the armed forces of a State would render a peacekeeping operation a party to the conflict. See Ferraro 2013, pp 583–587; ICRC 2015, pp 22–23. Some experts have, however, questioned this approach. See, for example, American Society of International Law 2014, p 157; Royal Institute of International Affairs 2014, p 6.

  79. 79.

    See, for example, High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations 2015, para 122. In the Mudacumura case, while it fell short of declaring that MONUC was a party to a NIAC, Pre-Trial Chamber II of the ICC stated that ‘there was an armed conflict in the territory of the DRC … of a non-international character’ and that ‘this armed conflict was between the FDLR … and the FARDC, in coalition with … MONUC during Kimia II and Amani Leo [FARDC operations supported by MONUC]’. ICC, Prosecutor v Mudacumura, Decision on the Prosecutor’s Application under Article 58, 13 July 2012, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/12, paras 31 and 34. See also ICC, Prosecutor v Mbarushimana, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 16 December 2011, Case No. ICC-01/04-01/10, paras 95 and 107. With respect to the situation in Côte d’Ivoire, Pre-Trial Chamber II of the ICC took note of the ICC Prosecutor’s intention to assess whether the support of UNOCI and French forces to pro-Ouattara forces in order to arrest Mr. Laurent Gbagbo, former President of Côte d’Ivoire, in April 2011 rendered the conflict an IAC, but it appears that such an assessment has not been undertaken. Situation in Côte d’Ivoire, above n. 63, para 127.

  80. 80.

    UN Secretary-General 2004, paras 23 and 24.

  81. 81.

    UN Security Council 2013a, para 12(b). At the time of writing, the latest extension of this mandate was contained in UN Security Council (2017), para 34(i)(d).

  82. 82.

    UN Secretary-General 2013a, paras 15, 35, 37; UN Secretary-General 2013b, paras 17–20, 37, 40.

  83. 83.

    Sheeran and Case 2014, pp 6–9.

  84. 84.

    See also UN International Law Commission 1996, para 104.

  85. 85.

    See, for example, Protocol amending the Agreement between the United Nations and the Democratic Republic of the Congo on the status of the United Nations Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, opened for signature 6 June 2006, entered into force 6 June 2006; Agreement between the United Nations and the African Union and Sudan concerning the status of the African Union/United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur, opened for signature 9 February 2008, 2503 UNTS 217, entered into force 9 February 2008, para 48; Status of Forces Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of the Central African Republic relating to the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic, opened for signature 2 September 2014, entered into force 2 September 2014, para 49.

  86. 86.

    The scope of this exclusion clause has been a subject of some debate. Bloom 1995, pp 625–626; Bourloyannis-Vrailas 1995b, pp 567–568; Bouvier 1995, pp 660–661; Kindred 1995, p 275; Kirsch 1995, p 105; Arsanjani 1996, pp 132–134; Greenwood 1996, pp 197–202; Engdahl 2005, pp 60–61; Zwanenburg 2005, pp 168–170.

  87. 87.

    Ad Hoc Committee 1994a, paras 76, 79 and 169. See also Bourloyannis-Vrailas 1995b, p 568; Arsanjani 1996, pp 143–145; Sheeran and Case 2014, p 11.

  88. 88.

    Ad Hoc Committee 1994b, annex I, para 13.

  89. 89.

    Ibid., para 14.

  90. 90.

    Ad Hoc Committee 1994a, p 56.

  91. 91.

    Ad Hoc Committee 1994b, annex I, para 12.

  92. 92.

    Ibid., para 11. This proposal was subsequently slightly modified. See Working Group 1994, at 7. The modified version eventually became Article 2(2) of the Safety Convention.

  93. 93.

    Ad Hoc Committee 1994b, annex I, para 14.

  94. 94.

    See UN General Assembly 1994c, p 15. See also Bloom 1995, p 625; Lepper 1996, pp 399–406; Maybee 2002, pp 29–30; Zwanenburg 2005, p 170; Pejic 2011, p 194; Whittle 2015, pp 856 and 871.

  95. 95.

    UN Secretary-General 2000b, paras 7, 12, 27–35.

  96. 96.

    Ibid., para 9.

  97. 97.

    Working Group 2003, at 4.

  98. 98.

    Working Group 2004, at 5.

  99. 99.

    Ad Hoc Committee 2004, para 39. Costa Rica also made the following reservation to the Safety Convention which, according to Costa Rica, reflected its position mentioned above: ‘The Government of the Republic enters a reservation to Article 2, para 2, of the Convention, to the effect that limiting the scope of application of the Convention is contrary to the pacifist thinking of our country and, accordingly, that, in the event of conflicts with the application of the Convention, Costa Rica will, where necessary, give precedence to humanitarian law.’ See also UN General Assembly 2001, para 33.

  100. 100.

    Ad Hoc Committee 2004, para 41; Working Group 2004, para 23; Ad Hoc Committee 2005, para 44.

  101. 101.

    Working Group 2004, para 23.

  102. 102.

    Ibid., para 26.

  103. 103.

    Ad Hoc Committee 2005, para 46.

  104. 104.

    Bouvier 1995, pp 26–27; Arsanjani 1996, p 143; Lepper 1996, pp 455–457.

  105. 105.

    Working Group 2004, para 29; Ad Hoc Committee 2005, para 51.

  106. 106.

    UN International Law Commission 1996, para 104.

  107. 107.

    UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court 1998, p 28.

  108. 108.

    Ibid.

  109. 109.

    See Cottier 2008, p 330; Bourloyannis-Vrailas 2000, p 364; Engdahl 2012, p 268.

  110. 110.

    UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court United Nations 2002, pp 214 and 227.

  111. 111.

    UN General Assembly 2013, para 11.

  112. 112.

    UN General Assembly 2016, para 11.

  113. 113.

    UN Security Council 2014c.

  114. 114.

    UN Secretary-General 2011b; UN Secretary-General 2011d, paras 5, 6, 8.

  115. 115.

    UN Security Council 2011.

  116. 116.

    UN Secretary-General 2013a, paras 15, 20; UN Secretary-General 2013b, at 17.

  117. 117.

    UN Security Council 2013b.

  118. 118.

    UN Secretary-General 2015b, paras 18, 25, 26; UN Secretary-General 2015c, para 22.

  119. 119.

    UN Security Council 2015d. See also UN Security Council 2016b, thirtieth preambular paragraph.

  120. 120.

    See the status-of-forces agreements for MONUSCO, UNAMID and MINUSCA, above n. 85.

References

  • Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of an International Convention dealing with the Safety and Security of United Nations and Associated Personnel (1994a) Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the work carried out during the period from 28 March to 8 April 1994. UN Doc. A/AC.242/2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of an International Convention dealing with the Safety and Security of United Nations and Associated Personnel (1994b) Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Elaboration of an International Convention dealing with the Safety and Security of United Nations and Associated Personnel. UN Doc. A/49/22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ad Hoc Committee on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (2004) Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. UN Doc. A/59/52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ad Hoc Committee on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (2005) Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. UN Doc. A/60/52.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Society of International Law (1952) Report of committee on study of legal problems of the United Nations: Should the laws of war apply to United Nations enforcement action? Proceedings of the American Society of International Law 46:216–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Society of International Law (2014) Peace forces at war: Implications under international humanitarian law. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Society of International Law 108:149–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arsanjani M (1996) Defending the blue helmets: Protection of United Nations personnel. In: Condorelli L et al. (eds) Nations Unies et le droit international humanitaire: Actes du Colloque international à l’occasion du cinquantième anniversaire de l’ONU. Éditions Pedone, Paris, pp 115–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bangura MA (2010) Prosecuting the crime of attack on peacekeepers: A prosecutor’s challenge. Leiden Journal of International Law 23:165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bloom E (1995) Protecting peacekeepers: The Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. American Journal of International Law 89:621–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bothe M (2002) War Crimes. In: Cassese A et al. (eds) The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A commentary, Vol. I. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 379–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourloyannis-Vrailas M-C (1995a) Safety and security of United Nations personnel in areas of internal armed conflict. Revue hellénique de droit international 48:95–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourloyannis-Vrailas M-C (1995b) The Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 44:560–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourloyannis-Vrailas M-C (2000) Crimes against United Nations and associated personnel. In: McDonald K G and Swaak-Goldman O (eds) Substantive and procedural aspects of international criminal law: The experience of international and national courts, Vol. I. Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp 333–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouvier A (1995) Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel: Presentation and analysis. International Review of the Red Cross 309:638–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowett D (1964), United Nations Forces. Sweet and Maxwell, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clapham A (2015) The concept of international armed conflict. In: Clapham A et al. (eds) The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cottier M (2008) Article 8(2)(b)(iii). In: Triffterer O (ed) Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 2nd edn. Verlag C.H. Beck oHG, Munich, pp 330–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • David E (2013) How does the involvement of a multinational peacekeeping force affect the classification of a situation? International Review of the Red Cross 891/892:660–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doria J (2009) Attacks on UN and regional organizations peacekeepers: Potential legal issues before the International Criminal Court. International Studies Journal 5:35–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engdahl O (2005) Protection of personnel in peace operations. International Peacekeeping 10:53–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engdahl O (2012) Prosecution of attacks against peacekeepers in international courts and tribunals. Military Law and the Law of War Review 51:249–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faite A (2007) Multinational forces acting pursuant to a mandate of the United Nations: Specific issues on the applicability of international humanitarian law. International Peacekeeping 11:143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faite A, Grenier J (eds) (2004) Expert meeting on multinational peace operations: Applicability of international humanitarian law and international human rights law to UN mandated forces. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro T (2013) The applicability and application of international humanitarian law to multinational forces. International Review of the Red Cross 891/892:561–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck D (2006) Securing status and protection of peacekeepers. In: Arnold R, Knoops G-J (eds) Practice and policies of modern peace support operations under international law. Transnational Publishers, Inc., New York, pp 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck D (2013) The legal status of personnel involved in United Nations peace operations. International Review of the Red Cross 891/892:613–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadler A (2010) The protection of peacekeepers and international criminal law: Legal challenges and broader protection. German Law Journal 11:585–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garraway C (2010) Applicability and application of international humanitarian law to enforcement and peace enforcement operations. In: Gill T, Fleck D (eds) The handbook of the international military operations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 129–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood C (1996) Protection of peacekeepers: The legal regime. Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 7:185–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood C (1998) International humanitarian law and United Nations military operations. Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 1:3–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henckaerts J-M, Doswald-Beck L (2005) Customary international humanitarian law, Vol. I: Rules. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva and Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (2015) Report of the High-level Independent Panel on Peace Operations on uniting our strengths for peace: politics, partnership and people. UN Doc. A/70/95-S/2015/446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute of International Law (1971) Conditions of application of humanitarian rules of armed conflict to hostilities in which United Nations forces may be engaged. Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International 54-II:465–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institute of International Law (1975) Conditions of application of rules, other than humanitarian rules, of armed conflict to hostilities in which United Nations forces may be engaged. Annuaire de l’Institut de Droit International 56:540–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (1999) Paper prepared by the International Committee of the Red Cross relating to the crimes listed in Article 8, para 2(b)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi), (vii), (ix), (xi) and (xii), of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, UN Doc. PCNICC/1999/WGEC/INF.2/Add.1.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (2008) How is the term “armed conflict” defined in international humanitarian law? International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (2009) Interpretive guidance on the notion of direct participation in hostilities under international humanitarian law. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (2011) International humanitarian law and the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (2015) International humanitarian law and the challenges of contemporary armed conflicts. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Committee of the Red Cross (2016) Commentary on the First Geneva Convention: Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, 2nd edn. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kindred H (1995) The protection of peacekeepers. Canadian Yearbook of International Law 33:257–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch P (1995) The Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. International Peacekeeping 2:102–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kleffner J (2010) Human rights and international humanitarian law: General issues. In: Gill T, Fleck D (eds) The handbook of the international military operations. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 51–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleffner J (2015) The beneficiaries of the rights stemming from common Article 3. In: Clapham A et al. (eds) The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 433–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb R (2003) Applicability of international humanitarian law to forces under the command of an international organization. In: Faite A, Labbé Grenier J (eds) Expert meeting on multinational peace operations: Applicability of international humanitarian law and international human rights law to UN mandated forces. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva, pp 61–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb R et al. (2005) L’application du droit international humanitaire et des droits de l’homme aux organisations internationales: Forces de paix et administrations civiles transitoires. Bruylant, Brussels.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepper S (1996) The legal status of military personnel in United Nations peace operations: One delegate’s analysis. Houston Journal of International Law 18:359–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Llewellyn H (2006) The Optional Protocol to the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. International and Comparative Law Quarterly 55:718–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maybee L (2002) Attacks on United Nations peacekeepers: Can international law protect the blue helmets? New Zealand Armed Forces Law Review 25:25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moir L (2015) The concept of non-international armed conflict. In: Clapham A et al. (eds) The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 391–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pacholska M (2015) (Il)legality of killing peacekeepers: The crime of attacking peacekeepers in the jurisprudence of international criminal tribunals. Journal of International Criminal Justice 13:14–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palwankar U (1993) Applicability of international humanitarian law to United Nations peace-keeping forces. International Review of the Red Cross 294:227–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pejic J (2011) The protective scope of common article 3: More than meets the eye. International Review of the Red Cross 881:189–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royal Institute of International Affairs (2014) The applicability of international humanitarian law to multinational forces: Discussion summary. Royal Institute of International Affairs, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandoz Y (1978) The application of humanitarian law by the armed forces of the United Nations Organization. International Review of the Red Cross 206:274–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoz Y et al. (eds) (1987) Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949. International Committee of the Red Cross, Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassòli M (2008) International humanitarian law and peace operations, scope of application ratione materiae. In: International Institute of Humanitarian Law (ed) International humanitarian law, human rights and peace operations. International Institute of Humanitarian Law, San Remo, pp 100–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler D (1984) United Nations forces in the law of peace and war. In: Swinarski C (ed) Studies and essays on international humanitarian law and Red Cross principles in honour of Jean Pictet. Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, pp 521–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seyersted F (1966) United Nations Forces in the Law of Peace and War. Sijthoff, Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheeran S, Case S (2014) The Intervention Brigade: Legal issues for the UN in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. International Peace Institute, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shraga D (1998) The United Nations as an actor bound by international humanitarian law. International Peacekeeping 5:64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shraga D (2009) The Secretary-General’s bulletin on the observance by United Nations forces of international humanitarian law: A decade later. Israel Yearbook on Human Rights 39:357–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Switzerland (1978) Official Records of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, Geneva (1974–1977). Swiss Federal Political Department, Bern.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court (1998) Report of the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court. UN Doc. A/CONF.183/2/Add.1.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court United Nations (2002) Official Records, Vol. III. UN Doc. A/CONF.183/13 (Vol. III).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (1993a) Sixth Committee, 16th meeting held on 21 October 1993, UN Doc. A/C.6/48/SR.16.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (1993b) Question of responsibility for attacks on United Nations and associated personnel and measures to ensure that those responsible for such attacks are brought to justice. UN Doc. A/RES/48/37.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (1994a) Establishment of an international criminal court. UN Doc. A/RES/49/53.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (1994b) Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. UN Doc. A/RES/49/59.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (1994c) 84th plenary meeting held on 9 December 1994. UN Doc. A/49/PV.84.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (2001) Sixth Committee, 4th meeting held on 9 October 2001, UN Doc. A/C.6/56/SR.4.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (2013) Safety and security of humanitarian personnel and protection of United Nations personnel. UN Doc. A/RES/68/101.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN General Assembly (2016) Safety and security of humanitarian personnel and protection of United Nations personnel. UN Doc. A/RES/71/129.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN International Law Commission (1996) Draft code of crimes against the peace and security of mankind. UN Doc. A/51/10.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (1992) An Agenda for Peace: Preventive diplomacy, peacemaking and peace-keeping. UN Doc. A/47/277-S/24111.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (1993) Security of United Nations operations. UN Doc. A/48/349-S/26358.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (1999) Secretary-General’s bulletin on the observance by United Nations forces of international humanitarian law. UN Doc. ST/SGB/1999/13.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2000a) Report of the Secretary-General on the establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone. UN Doc. S/2000/915.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2000b) Scope of legal protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel. UN Doc. A/55/637.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2004) Sixteenth report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organizations Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, UN Doc. S/2004/1034.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2005) Eighteenth report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organizations Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2005/506.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2009a) Twenty-seventh report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2009/160.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2009b) Twenty-eighth report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2009/335.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2009c) Twenty-ninth report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2009/472.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2009d) Thirtieth report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2009/623.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2010a) Thirty-first report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2010/164.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2010b) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2010/512.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2011a) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2011/20.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2011b) Letter dated 4 April from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2011/221.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General of the United Nations (2011c) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2011/298.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2011d) Twenty-eighth report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Operation in Côte d’Ivoire. UN Doc. S/2011/387.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2011e) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2011/656.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2012) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2012/65.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2013a) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2013/581.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2013b) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2013/757.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2014a) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2014/157.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2014b) Report of the Secretary-General on the situation in Mali. UN Doc. S/2014/943.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2015a) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. UN Doc. S/2015/172.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2015b) Report of the Secretary-General on the situation in Mali. UN Doc. S/2015/219.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2015c) Report of the Secretary-General on the situation in Mali. UN Doc. S/2015/1030.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary-General (2016) Report of the Secretary-General on the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, UN Doc. S/2016/833.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (1993) Note by the President of the Security Council. UN Doc. S/25493.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (1994) Final Report of the Commission of Experts established pursuant to Security Council resolution 780 (1992). UN Doc. S/1994/674, annex.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (1999) Resolution 1270. UN Doc. S/RES/1270 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2008) Resolution 1856. UN Doc. S/RES/1856 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2011) Resolution 2000. UN Doc. S/RES/2000 (2011).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2013a) Resolution 2098. UN Doc. S/RES/2098 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2013b) Statement by the President of the Security Council. UN Doc. S/PRST/2013/17.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2014a) Resolution 2147. UN Doc. S/RES/2147 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2014b) Resolution 2149. UN Doc. S/RES/2149 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2014c) Resolution 2175. UN Doc. S/RES/2175 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2015a) Resolution 2211. UN Doc. S/RES/2211 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2015b) Resolution 2217. UN Doc. S/RES/2217 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2015c) Resolution 2245. UN Doc. S/RES/2245 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2015d) Statement by the President of the Security Council. UN Doc. S/PRST/2014/5.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2016a) Resolution 2277. UN Doc. S/RES/2277 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2016b) Resolution 2295. UN Doc. S/RES/2295 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2016c) Resolution 2304. UN Doc. S/RES/2304 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Security Council (2017) Resolution 2348. UN Doc. S/RES/2348 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (2000) Regulation No. 2000/15 on the establishment of panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences. UN Doc. UNTAET/REG/2000/15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vité S (2009) Typology of armed conflicts in international humanitarian law: Legal concepts and actual situations. International Review of the Red Cross 873:69–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittle D (2015) Peacekeeping in conflict: The Intervention Brigade, MONUSCO, and the application of international humanitarian law to United Nations forces. Georgetown Journal of International law 46:837–875.

    Google Scholar 

  • Working Group of the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly (1994) Report of the Working Group, UN Doc. A/C.6/49/L.4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Working Group of the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (2003) Report of the Working Group on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, UN Doc. A/C.6/58/L.16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Working Group of the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel (2004) Report of the Working Group on the Scope of Legal Protection under the Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, UN Doc. A/C.6/59/L.9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwanenburg M (2005) Accountability of peace support operations. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office of the Legal Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs, United Nations, New York, USA

    Keiichiro Okimoto

Authors
  1. Keiichiro Okimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keiichiro Okimoto .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Policy and Legal Unit, Geneva Call, Chêne-Bougeries, Geneva, Switzerland

    Ezequiel Heffes

  2. Observatory of International Humanitarian Law, School of Law, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Marcos D. Kotlik

  3. Office of the Prosecutor, International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, Arusha, Tanzania

    Manuel J. Ventura

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 T.M.C. Asser Press and the authors

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Okimoto, K. (2020). The Legal Protection of Personnel of United Nations Peacekeeping Operations in Times of NIAC. In: Heffes, E., Kotlik, M., Ventura, M. (eds) International Humanitarian Law and Non-State Actors. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-339-9_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-339-9_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-338-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-339-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation