Abstract
The relevance of this study lies in the need to understand the interaction between conventional law and the circumstances of society in wartime, especially in the context of modern conflicts. The purpose of this study was to identify this interaction and determine its impact on the current legal environment. To fulfil this purpose, various research methods were employed, including literature review, document analysis, empirical research, comparative analysis, and expert evaluation. These methods helped to systematise information and carry out a reasoned analysis of the interaction between legal norms and the circumstances of modern society in the context of military operations. The findings of this study show that the problem of implementing conventional law in the context of armed conflict is caused not only by different interpretations of its provisions, but also by systematic violations of international humanitarian law by the parties to the conflict. It is noted that some of these violations may be the result of a lack of clarity or contradictions in the texts of the conventions, as well as differences in national legislation. Specific examples were considered in the context of different types of conflicts, including armed conflicts and situations of occupation, where systematic violations of human rights and humanitarian standards are recorded. Specifically, the study investigated the attitude towards civilians, the circumstances of warfare, the treatment of prisoners of war, the provision of medical care in the conflict zone, humanitarian aid, access to education and food. The study also examined the manipulation of information and the legal framework by Russia. In view of the identified difficulties in implementing conventional law, the study proposed concrete ways to improve the international legal mechanism, namely by clarifying and harmonising the rules of international humanitarian law, ensuring more effective monitoring and accountability for violations, and engaging in dialogue with all stakeholders, neutral observers and partner countries to jointly find solutions. This allows formulating recommendations for international organisations, states, and human rights groups on further measures to ensure compliance with conventional law in the context of armed conflict and improve human rights protection
Publisher
Scientific Journals Publishing House
Reference33 articles.
1. [1] Al-Kassimi, K. (2023). Natoʼs anglo-american identity and the Ukrainian crisis from an ontological security perspective – can a realist international system give diplomacy a chance? Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1), article number 2200665. doi: 10.1080/23311886.2023.2200665.
2. [2] Alston, P. (2023). Criminalizing human rights. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 15(3), 660-677. doi: 10.1093/ jhuman/huad059.
3. [3] Amnesty international. (2023). Ukraine organizational report: Key findings and learnings relating to the august 4 press release on Ukraine. London: Amnesty international.
4. [4] Amnesty international. (2024). Ukraine: Childrenʼs education is another victim of Russian aggression. London: Amnesty international.
5. [5] Bondarenko, K.V. (2022). Formation of mechanisms of public administration support for refugees and internally displaced persons. (Masterʼs diploma, Dnipro State Agrarian and Economic University, Dnipro, Ukraine).