Law lecture
Human rights and humanitarian law interface
Syeda Sakina Mumtaz Huq
December 10 is Human Rights Day, keeping that in mind and to create further awareness Brac University Law Club, School of law, Brac University organised a seminar on “Human Rights and Humanitarian law”. It started with a welcome speech by Dr. Shahdeen Malik, Director, School of Law of Brac University. He emphasised on the horrendous barbarity and violence in the form of war irrespective of groups, religious, ethnic and national which has been practiced over the century. Humanitarian law, he said is a norm which reduces the barbarity during the times of war. He also pointed out that our nation at present is trying to establish different institutions like National Human Rights Commission and Information Commission for the purpose to ensure that we live our life in a much more civilised, non-violent and decent way.
Ishtiaq Ahmed, President of BU Law Club came up with his brief speech mostly emphasising on the meaning of the human rights and the humanitarian law and stated that the purpose of studying law is not only to create lawyers but also a social engineer. Dr. Saira Rahman Khan, advisor of BU Law Club mainly focused on the defenders of human rights. She said that a defender of human rights should not have to be a person who has a graduation or specialisation in human rights area. No matter what the person is, man or woman, regardless of occupation, can join as a human rights defender. The basic characteristic of human rights defenders is to understand what is right and recognise what is wrong. They must be able to uphold the fundamental principle that, all human beings are equal in dignity and rights. Meaning of human rights depends on the democratic society, where the people are empowered with the information and knowledge. Students of law certenly can be the future campaigner of human rights.
Humanitarian law is a part of human rights and this was elaborated by the guest Lecturer, Mr. Gabriele Dereghetti, Deputy Head of Mission, Political, Cultural and Economic Affairs, Embassy of Switzerland. International humanitarian law forms a major part of public international law and comprises the rules in times of arm conflict which seek to protect people who are not or are no longer taking part in the hostilities, and to restrict the methods and means of warfare employed. The International Committee of The Red Cross (ICRC) by the Geneva Conventions of 1949 got the right to carry out certain activities such as bringing relief to wounded or sick military personnel, visiting prisoners of war, aiding civilians and ensuring that those protected by humanitarian law are treated accordingly. International humanitarian law which is also known as the law of armed conflicts or law of war has two branches: first is the “law of Geneva”, which is designed to safeguard military personnel who are no longer participating in the fighting such as prisoners, wounded people and the civilians who are not actively involved in warfare. Second is the “law of Hague” which establishes the rights and obligations of belligerents in the conduct of war which should be respected. It limits the means of harming the enemy.
Mr. Dereghetti also pointed out the difference between international humanitarian law (IHL) and human rights law. He said that these two are the complimentary bodies of law. Both endeavour to protect the lives, health and dignity of individuals, although from different angles. Humanitarian law applies in situations of armed conflict whereas human rights protect the individual at all time, in war and peace alike. Humanitarian law aims to protect people who do not or are no longer taking part in hostilities. The rules personified in IHL impose duties on all parties to a conflict. On the other hand human rights apply to protect every individual from arbitrary behaviour by their own government. Certain common features can be found from the both as such right to life, prohibition against torture, ill treatment and fair trial. Mr. Dereghetti also mentioned that the concept of International humanitarian law is not a new thing. It was there from the first. If we see the customary law of ancient time there was also a practice of humanitarian law like norms in battle field, to protect women.
Then by Geneva Convention it was recognised and legalised, later lots of evolutions came across through this convention. Regarding the reinforcement and promotion of IHL, he said that the basis of the humanitarian law is stated in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, which should be respected by the people. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) as the promoter and guardian of international humanitarian law, encourages people to respect the law. It does so by spreading knowledge of the humanitarian rules and by reminding parties to conflict of their obligations. Since the ignorance of the law is an obstacle to its implementation, the ICRC reminds States that they have undertaken to make the humanitarian provisions known and to take all the necessary steps to ensure that the law is applied effectively. At the end of his speech, he thanked the Bangladeshi delegates who are contributing their hands in the war areas and appreciated their excellence of work which we should be proud of.
One of the wings of human rights, the right to information, was discussed elaborately by Mr. Muhammad Zamir, Chief Information Commissioner in his speech. He mentioned the interesting background of Right to Information (RTI), which took place in Sweden around 1766. The King in those days were accountable to provide information of their work and to stay transparent about what they are doing and that started the right to information. But none of the conservative or the developing countries adopted it for 200 years. Then in 1966 America adopted the concept of right to information. President Johnson took the initiative to introduce the Disclosure of Information Act. The reason for the delay is that after the death of John F Kennedy, Robert Kennedy was the attorney general of the administration and there were 11 Commissions which were there to uphold the entire matter. Eventually all the aspects of RTI were not clarified. From 1966 till 1992 (when Bill Clinton came), the principles related to Disclosure of Information were not in focus. The concept of RTI was not even accepted in London. It was adopted in London in 2000 with much controversy by the political parties. Finally there was separate RTI introduced for England, Northern Ireland and Wales and a separate one for Scotland. This difference between the two areas eventually created lots of problems. The right to freedom of information, and particularly the right of access to information held by public authorities, has attracted a great deal of attention recently. Mr. Zamir emphasised that RTI is a process or an authority and there must be a designated officer for it who will face all kinds of questions and gave answer to it properly. The Information Commission is the first institution which has been enacted through an Act. The Right of Information Act 2009, gives a person the right to ask for information from any kind of institution whether it is government or non government and that institution should maintain the transparency and accountability to the people at large. To maintain the transparency and to reduce the corruption there has to be a designated officer which will be appointed by that institution from whom all the answers of the desired questions will be available. There is a time limit of 20 working days by then the information need to be presented.
If he fails to do so then he can take another 10 days to gather the information if requires from the third party. If still the designated officer fails to provide the information then the applicant can go to the information commission which is also works as a tribunal, can appeal in front of the chief information commissioner who will then ask for a show cause to the person concern regarding the failure to provide the information. There can be exceptions on this aspect and that is, if there is any information which cannot be disclosed because of the national security then that can be acceptable. But we need be aware of the matter that this exception should not be abused.
Finally the session was closed by some open discussions followed by a screening of document regarding “Tribunal against Torture” and some words of encouragement by Professor K. Shamsuddin Mahmood, Head of Undergraduate Programme, School of Law, BRAC University .
The writer is a student of Law, University of London, UK.
