Abstract:
This era's conflicts are fought by and against NSAs. Traditional tools to defend Human Rights and prevent humanitarian abuses, such as the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (the Conventions) and the Two Additional Protocols of 1977 (the Protocols), were designed to apply primarily to States. Because only states are allowed to maintain diplomatic relations with other states, make treaties, and be members of international organisations, NSAs were not expected to adhere to the same rules as that of states. While states are bound by IHL norms and laws, NSAs actions appear to be unregulated by IHL. NSAs employ a variety of illegal warfare tactics, including affecting civilians with illegal weapons and making vicious statements by way of bombing schools, religious institutions, and hospitals for a variety of reasons. They receive not just political support from sponsoring regimes, but also monetary and military aid from some states. As a result, civilians are the ones who suffer the most due to the result of NSAs' use of violence. Therefore, the applicability of IHL to NSAs will be discussed in this study, which will look at the laws that apply to NSAs and their associated elements. The paper will also explore how to move forward with NSAs in terms of IHL compliance and enforcement, as well as its drawbacks in the form of valid concerns. This paper will also go over the instances under which self-defence can be used by a state to curb the violent activities of NSAs, which existed long before the UN and its Charter which were established in 1945 and have existed as customary international law.
