This article examines legal aspects of climate-induced forced displacement in the Sahel region of North Africa. The Sahel region is being adversely affected by climate change, leading to the displacement of thousands of people, both cross-border migrants and internally displaced persons (IDPs). The conventional stance is that refugee status does not extend to individuals displaced as a result of natural or environmental catastrophes and that consequently a normative gap exists in international refugee law. However, the position in international law may not be as clear-cut as this conventional view assumes, in light of recent trends which are moving towards the recognition of the rights of such displaced people. It seems clear that under the terms of the 1951 Refugee Convention, such people are excluded from refugee status, and while the situation is less obvious under the Organisation of African Unity Convention on Refugees in Africa, it appears that the end result is the same, although there seems to be an increasing desire for recognition of refugee status under that treaty. Other regional treaties are also taking tentative steps in this direction; the Kampala Convention on IDPs is especially noteworthy because it makes express references to circumstances such as natural disasters. A human rights approach may offer hope to displaced people, since climate change can impact on a number of rights – particularly significant is the decision of the UN Human Rights Committee in Teitiota v. New Zealand which acknowledged the harmful impact of climate change. The response, legislative and otherwise, of five Sahel States towards forcibly displaced persons is examined in this article.

International humanitarian law is the branch of customary and treaty-based international positive law whose purposes are to limit the methods and means of warfare and to protect the victims of armed conflicts. Grave breaches of its rules constitute war crimes for which individuals may be held directly accountable and which it is up to sovereign states to prosecute. However, should a state not wish to, or not be in a position to, prosecute, the crimes can be tried by international criminal tribunals instituted by treaty or by binding decision of the United Nations Security Council. This brief description of the current legal and political situation reflects the state of the law at the dawn of the twenty-first century. It does not, however, describe the work of a single day or the fruit of a single endeavour. Quite the contrary, it is the outcome of the international community's growing awareness, in the face of the horrors of war and the indescribable suffering inflicted on humanity throughout the ages, that there must be limits to violence and that those limits must be established by the law and those responsible punished so as to discourage future perpetrators from exceeding them.

The Montreux Document on Private Military and Security Companies (Montreux Document) was adopted in 2008 by seventeen States to reaffirm and, as far as was necessary, clarify the existing obligations of States and other actors under international law, in particular under international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL). It also aimed at identifying good practices and regulatory options to assist States in promoting respect for IHL and IHRL by private military and security companies (PMSCs). Today, fifty-one States and three international organizations have endorsed the Montreux Document. It contains twenty-seven “Statements” – sections recalling the main international legal obligations of States in regard to the operations of PMSCs during armed conflicts. Each statement is the reaffirmation of a general rule of IHL, IHRL or State responsibility formulated in a way that clarifies its applicability to PMSC operations. This article aims to detail the basis of each legal obligation mentioned in the first part of the Montreux Document (Part I). The article follows the structure of Part I, in order to better facilitate its comprehension. The second part of the Montreux Document, relating to good practices, is not covered in this article.

For more than 30 years the codification of state responsibility has been the main task of the International Law Commission, which has placed greater emphasis on financial reparations than on criminal sanctions. Since the 1990s, however, the responsibility of individuals for gross violations of humanitarian law has been one of the main topics in international law. This new approach implies discrepancies between domestic practice and international case law in terms of the nature and scale of sanctions, the role of victims and also the accountability of non-state entities, including private companies and international organizations.

Quand on entreprend de retracer les interventions charitables du St-Siège durant la guerre, on est tout d'abord frappé de leur ampleur croissante.

Une idée simple et féconde y a présidé dès le début : nous la trouvons exprimée dans une circulaire du cardinal secrétaire d'Etat aux cardinaux archevêques des nations belligérantes. En leur transmettant, le 22 janvier 1915, certaines prescriptions du St-Siège, qui avaient pour but de faciliter, grâce aux bons offices d'ecclésiastiques spécialement désignés à cet effet la correspondance des prisonniers de guerre avec leurs families, le cardinal Gasparri précisait : « Je crois superflu d'ajouter que là où le décret parle de prisonniers, Sa Sainteté entend qu'on ne fasse aucune distinction ni de religion, ni de langue, ni de nationalité. Mais si votre Eminence le juge à propos, qu'elle veuille bien faire connaître à chaque évêque l'intention du Saint Père, afin que l'action bienfaisante des prêtres indiqués dans le décret embrasse tous les malheureux prisonniers avec la même extension que la charité de Jésus-Christ».

La segunda Conferencia Mundial de Derechos Humanos, que señala el 45º aniversario de la aprobación de la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos, fue inaugurada el 14 de junio de 1993 por el secretario general de las Naciones Unidas, señor Butros Ghali.

Participaron en esta Conferencia, que terminó sus trabajos el 25 de junio, unas 5.000 personas, repartidas en diversas categorías: Estados, Estados miembros de las Naciones Unidas, observadores y organizaciones no gubernamentales (ONG).

At the International Colloquium held by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law, at Sanremo last September, a paper was submitted on military instructions concerning the treatment of prisoners in situations arising from guerrilla warfare. In view of the importance of the subject and of the interesting references made to history, we are publishing the introduction and conclusion of this study, which will later appear in the official records of the International Institute of Humanitarian Law, as well as some of the historical examples given by the author. (Ed.)

… Why and how did the International Committee of the Red Cross commit itself? The reasons for its commitment were clearly expressed by the Delegate-General of the ICRC for Africa, even before the break was complete between the government of Nigeria and the leaders of the Eastern province. Concluding a report giving; an account, at the end of 1966, of the disturbances by which Nigeria had been torn during the year, Mr. Georges Hoffmann—under the title “Disaster relief in case of man-made disaster”—defined the task he wanted the ICRC to undertake: “A holocaust is taking place; there are victims, and care must be given to those who are not dead. As in the case of natural disasters, there must be teams of surgeons, supplies of surgical equipment, medical supplies, foodstuffs and blankets, and there must be means of transport, particularly ambulances and vans”. In short, it was necessary to set up in Geneva, in agreement with the League of Red Cross Societies, an organization which would make it possible to confront those “man-made disasters” similar to the one which the League had already created in Nigeria to deal with natural disasters.

The International Conference for the Protection of War Victims, held from 30 August to 1 September 1993 in Geneva, the “cradle” of humanitarian law, was an important event in international life. It gave an opportunity to diplomats of practically every nation not only to consider general issues of international humanitarian law, but also to discuss what to do in order to react adequately to the challenges of today, above all the escalation of armed conflicts and violations of international humanitarian law.

La Croix-Rouge survivra-t-elle? Devrait-elle survivre? A-t-elle vraiment une mission à remplir dans le monde d'aujourd'hui? Dans le monde des années 1980 et celles qui suivront? En quoi consiste cette mission? Comment la Croix-Rouge peut-elle s'y préparer?

Ces questions ont fait l'objet de discussions approfondies de la part des membres de la Croix-Rouge pendant quelques années. En 1972, le CICR et la Ligue des Sociétés de la Croix-Rouge, en coopération avec les Sociétés nationales, décidèrent d'examiner l'avenir en entreprenant une étude complète du rôle de la Croix-Rouge.

The International Committee felt much grief over the death in Auckland on July 10, 1964 of Mr. Léon Bossard, its delegate in New Zealand for a number of years.

The Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 provide that medical personnel and equipment shall in general be identified by the distinctive emblem of the red cross or red crescent. The Second Geneva Convention, applicable to the victims of conflict at sea, specifies that the exterior surfaces of hospital ships and smaller craft used for medical purposes shall be white and recommends that the parties to the conflict use “the most modern methods” to facilitate identification of medical transports at sea (Art. 43). It is also recommended that medical aircraft should be clearly marked with both the distinctive emblem and their national colours on their lower, upper and lateral surfaces. They should moreover be provided with “any other markings or means of identification” agreed upon between the belligerents from the outbreak or during the course of hostilities (First Convention, Art. 36, and Second Convention, Art. 39).

Los emblemas de la cruz roja y el de la media Itina roja son a la vez lafuerza y la debilidad de nuestro Movimiento.

Son sufuerzaporque son el símbolo visible y respetado del socorro a las víctimas de la guerra que, desde hace 125 años, ha permitido prestar protectión, asistencia y calor humano a millones de heridos, prisioneros, niños, familias, etc., en el marco de los terribles conflictos que han convulsionado nuestro planeta como nunca en su historia. Son su fuerza porque evocan, en el mundo entero, una imagen positiva de humanidady de compasión.

Pero esos emblemas son también ladebilidaddel Movimiento, porque son portadores de división en su seno y le impiden alcanzar la universalidad.

Ante este problema, quisiéamos, naturalmente, rehacer la historia.

El señor Gottfried de Smit, miembro del Comité Intemacional de la Cruz Roja, presentó su renuncia. El CICR ha aceptado con pesar y expresa al señor de Smit su agradecimiento por su valiosa colaboración. El señor de Smit fue nombrado miembro del Consejo Ejecutivo del CICR en 1973, y miembro de la Asamblea del CICR a comienzos de 1974.