A National Committee on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is a governmental advisory body tasked with promoting and implementing IHL within a country. These committees serve as a bridge between international humanitarian principles and national legislation, ensuring that a state's legal and administrative frameworks align with its IHL obligations.

The committee's roles include advising the government on IHL matters, assisting in the ratification and implementation of IHL treaties, and promoting awareness and education on IHL principles among state officials, military personnel, and the public. They also collaborate with international organizations, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to enhance compliance with IHL.

In India, the National Committee on IHL works under the Ministry of External Affairs and includes representatives from various government departments, armed forces, and legal experts. It focuses on integrating IHL into national laws, policies, and military training programs, and ensuring India's adherence to international treaties like the Geneva Conventions.

By fostering a national culture of respect for humanitarian principles, these committees play a crucial role in the protection of human rights during armed conflicts, contributing to global efforts to minimize the impact of war on civilians and combatants alike.

The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the country, outlining the framework for political principles, procedures, and powers of government institutions, as well as fundamental rights and duties of citizens. Adopted on January 26, 1950, it establishes India as a sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic republic. The Constitution includes provisions for fundamental rights (Articles 12-35), such as the right to equality, freedom of speech, and protection from discrimination. It also enshrines the directive principles of state policy, guiding the government in creating a just society.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL), also known as the laws of war or the law of armed conflict, is a set of rules that seek to limit the effects of armed conflict by protecting non-combatants and restricting the means and methods of warfare. Key IHL instruments include the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols.

While the Indian Constitution primarily focuses on the rights and governance within India, it also aligns with IHL principles through Article 51, which encourages the state to promote international peace and security and respect international law and treaty obligations. India's commitment to IHL is reflected in its adherence to various international treaties and conventions, integrating IHL norms into its national legal framework.

The rules of protection of prisoners of war (POWs) under International Humanitarian Law (IHL) are outlined primarily in the Third Geneva Convention of 1949. These rules aim to ensure the humane treatment, rights, and protections of captured combatants who are no longer taking part in hostilities. The protections afforded to POWs are considered essential for upholding the principles of humanity and maintaining respect for the laws and customs of war. The key provisions of the Third Geneva Convention include:

1. Definition of Prisoner of War:

   • Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention provides a comprehensive definition of who qualifies as a prisoner of war. POWs include members of the armed forces of a party to the conflict, as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
   • The definition also extends to individuals who are accompanying the armed forces without being members thereof, such as medical personnel and journalists, provided that they are carrying out their duties in conformity with the laws and customs of war.

2. Treatment and Protection:

   • POWs must be treated humanely and with dignity at all times. They are entitled to respect for their person, honor, beliefs, and religious practices, without discrimination based on race, nationality, religion, or political opinion.
   • POWs must be protected against acts of violence, intimidation, insults, and public curiosity. They are entitled to receive medical care, food, clothing, and shelter in accordance with their physical and mental needs.
   • POWs are also entitled to exercise their rights, including the right to correspond with their families, receive visits, and communicate with representatives of the Protecting Power, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and other humanitarian organizations.

3. Conditions of Internment:

   • POWs must be interned in designated places of detention that meet the requirements of health, hygiene, and safety. These places of internment must be located away from the combat zone and protected from the dangers of military operations.
   • POWs are entitled to be housed in adequate accommodation, provided with sufficient food and water, and allowed to engage in recreational and cultural activities. They must also be allowed to retain personal belongings, including uniforms and personal effects.

4. Legal Protections and Judicial Guarantees:

   • POWs are entitled to legal protections and judicial guarantees, including the right to be informed promptly of the reasons for their detention and any charges against them. They have the right to a fair and impartial trial by a competent tribunal, with the assistance of legal counsel if necessary.
   • POWs must be allowed to challenge the legality of their detention and to appeal against any judicial decisions affecting their rights and status. They are protected against arbitrary deprivation of liberty and must be released and repatriated without delay after the cessation of active hostilities.

5. Prohibition of Coercion and Interrogation:

   • POWs must not be subjected to coercion, threats, or any form of physical or mental torture to obtain information or confessions. They are protected against interrogation or exploitation for intelligence purposes.
   • POWs are only required to provide their name, rank, serial number, and date of birth when questioned by the detaining power. They are not obliged to provide any further information or collaborate with the enemy beyond what is required by the Geneva Conventions.

6. Role of the Protecting Power and ICRC:

   • The Protecting Power, appointed by the detaining power and recognized by the parties to the conflict, plays a crucial role in monitoring the treatment and conditions of internment of POWs. It facilitates communication between POWs and their families, ensures compliance with the Geneva Conventions, and investigates allegations of violations.
   • The ICRC also has a mandate to visit places of internment, monitor the treatment of detainees, and provide humanitarian assistance and protection to POWs. It acts as a neutral intermediary between the detaining power and the POWs, promoting respect for their rights and ensuring their welfare.

In conclusion, the rules of protection of prisoners of war under International Humanitarian Law are designed to safeguard the rights, dignity, and well-being of captured combatants who are no longer taking part in hostilities. These rules are enshrined in the Third Geneva Convention of 1949 and reflect fundamental principles of humanity, impartiality, and respect for the laws and customs of war. Effective implementation and enforcement of these rules are essential for upholding the principles of humanitarianism, preventing abuses, and promoting respect for human dignity in situations of armed conflict.

The right of individual or collective self-defense is a fundamental principle of international law that allows states to protect themselves from armed attacks or imminent threats of armed attacks. It is enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and is considered a customary norm of international law. This right recognizes the inherent right of states to use force in response to aggression and to defend their sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security. However, the exercise of the right of self-defense is subject to certain conditions and limitations under international law.

Conditions under which the right of self-defense is available:

1. Armed Attack:

   • The right of self-defense arises in response to an armed attack by another state. An armed attack can take various forms, including military invasion, armed aggression, or the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of a state.
   • The attack must be sufficiently serious and significant to justify the use of force in self-defense. Minor skirmishes or isolated incidents may not rise to the level of an armed attack under international law.

2. Imminence and Necessity:

   • The threat of armed attack must be imminent or immediate for the right of self-defense to be invoked. States cannot use force preemptively or on the basis of speculative threats that have not materialized or do not pose an immediate danger.
   • The use of force must be necessary to repel the armed attack or prevent further aggression. States must exhaust all peaceful means of resolving disputes before resorting to force, and the use of force must be proportionate to the threat faced.

3. Attribution of the Attack:

   • The armed attack must be attributable to another state or non-state actor acting on behalf of a state for the right of self-defense to be invoked. States cannot use force in self-defense against attacks perpetrated by non-state actors without the involvement or support of a state.
   • The concept of attribution requires states to establish a causal link between the armed attack and the responsible state or actor, based on evidence of direct involvement, support, or control.

4. Proportionality:

   • The use of force in self-defense must be proportional to the threat posed and necessary to repel the armed attack or prevent further aggression. States are not permitted to respond with excessive or disproportionate force that goes beyond what is necessary to defend themselves.
   • The principle of proportionality requires states to balance the necessity of self-defense with the humanitarian considerations and the need to minimize civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure.

5. Notification to the Security Council:

   • Article 51 of the UN Charter requires states exercising the right of self-defense to report the measures taken to the Security Council immediately. This notification serves as a form of accountability and transparency, allowing the Security Council to assess the situation and take appropriate action to maintain international peace and security.
   • States are obligated to cooperate with the Security Council and refrain from actions that would escalate or prolong the conflict or undermine the authority of the UN.

6. Temporary Nature:

   • The right of self-defense is considered temporary and ceases once the armed attack has ended or the threat of attack has been neutralized. States are required to resort to peaceful means to resolve disputes and conflicts, including negotiation, mediation, and arbitration, once the immediate danger has passed.

In conclusion, the right of individual or collective self-defense is a foundational principle of international law that allows states to protect themselves against armed attacks and ensure their security and survival. However, the exercise of this right is subject to strict conditions and limitations, including the requirement of imminence, necessity, attribution, proportionality, notification to the Security Council, and the temporary nature of the right. States must carefully assess the circumstances and consequences of using force in self-defense and adhere to the principles of international law to maintain peace, stability, and respect for human rights in the international community.

The Nuremberg Trials, held between 1945 and 1946, established important legal principles and precedents for prosecuting individuals responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other atrocities committed during World War II. These principles, enshrined in the judgments of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg, laid the foundation for modern international criminal law and shaped subsequent developments in the field of international justice. The main principles established in the Nuremberg Tribunal case include:

1. Individual Criminal Responsibility:

   • The Nuremberg Trials affirmed the principle of individual criminal responsibility for violations of international law, rejecting the notion of immunity for state officials acting in their official capacity.
   • The judgments held that individuals could be held accountable for their actions, regardless of their official position or orders received from superiors. This principle established the basis for prosecuting individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.

2. Crimes Against Peace:

   • The Nuremberg Tribunal recognized the crime of "crimes against peace" as a distinct offense under international law. This included planning, initiating, and waging aggressive war, as well as participating in a common plan or conspiracy to commit such acts.
   • The trials held senior Nazi leaders responsible for the planning and execution of aggressive wars, including the invasion of Poland in 1939 and other acts of aggression that led to the outbreak of World War II.

3. War Crimes:

   • The Nuremberg Tribunal defined war crimes as violations of the laws and customs of war, including acts such as murder, torture, and inhumane treatment of prisoners of war and civilians.
   • The trials prosecuted individuals for war crimes committed during armed conflict, including the mistreatment and killing of prisoners, the use of slave labor, and the targeting of civilian populations.

4. Crimes Against Humanity:

   • The Nuremberg Tribunal recognized crimes against humanity as offenses committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population, including murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts.
   • The trials held individuals accountable for crimes against humanity committed against civilian populations, including the Holocaust and other atrocities perpetrated by the Nazi regime.

5. Superior Responsibility:

   • The Nuremberg Tribunal established the principle of "superior responsibility," holding individuals accountable for crimes committed by subordinates under their effective control or authority.
   • Senior military and political leaders were prosecuted for failing to prevent or punish war crimes and atrocities committed by their subordinates, even if they did not personally participate in the crimes.

6. Fair Trial Rights:

   • The Nuremberg Trials affirmed the importance of fair trial rights and procedural guarantees for defendants accused of international crimes.
   • Defendants were afforded the right to legal representation, the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and other due process protections.

Overall, the Nuremberg Tribunal case established fundamental principles of international criminal law and laid the groundwork for subsequent efforts to hold individuals accountable for the most serious violations of international law. The judgments of the Nuremberg Trials remain influential in shaping the development of modern international justice mechanisms, including the establishment of international criminal tribunals and the prosecution of individuals for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.