International Humanitarian Law (IHL), commonly known as the law of armed conflict or the law of war, is a body of international law designed to limit the suffering caused by war. Unlike international human rights law, which applies during both peace and conflict, IHL comes into operation only during armed conflicts. Its primary objective is to protect those who are not, or are no longer, taking part in hostilities, including civilians, prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, medical personnel, and humanitarian workers. At the same time, it regulates the means and methods of warfare by prohibiting unnecessary suffering and ensuring that military operations are conducted within internationally accepted legal limits. The modern framework of IHL is built upon the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, which together form one of the most widely accepted legal regimes in the world.
For Bangladesh, International Humanitarian Law is far more than an abstract legal concept. It is deeply rooted in the country's history and national identity. The Liberation War of 1971 witnessed one of the gravest humanitarian tragedies in South Asia. Millions of people were displaced, hundreds of thousands lost their lives, and countless civilians were subjected to torture, rape, enforced disappearances, and other atrocities. These events highlighted the devastating consequences of violations of humanitarian law and created a lasting national commitment to ensuring that such crimes would never be forgotten. As a result, Bangladesh's implementation of IHL has always been closely linked to the pursuit of justice for the crimes committed during the Liberation War.
Soon after achieving independence, Bangladesh demonstrated its commitment to humanitarian principles by acceding to the four Geneva Conventions in 1972 and later ratifying Additional Protocol I in 1980. These treaties require states to protect victims of armed conflict, respect medical services, treat prisoners of war humanely, and distinguish between civilians and combatants during military operations. Bangladesh has also become a party to several international treaties that complement humanitarian law, including the Genocide Convention. These commitments reflect the country's intention to uphold internationally recognised humanitarian standards and contribute to the global effort to reduce the human cost of armed conflict.
For Bangladesh, International Humanitarian Law is far more than an abstract legal concept. It is deeply rooted in the country's history and national identity. The Liberation War of 1971 witnessed one of the gravest humanitarian tragedies in South Asia.
International treaties alone, however, cannot guarantee compliance. Their effectiveness depends on how they are incorporated into domestic law and enforced by national institutions. The most significant step taken by Bangladesh to implement International Humanitarian Law was the enactment of the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973. Passed only two years after independence, the Act created a domestic legal framework for prosecuting individuals responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes against peace, and other serious violations of international law committed during the Liberation War. At a time when many countries relied upon international tribunals to prosecute such offences, Bangladesh chose to establish its own legal mechanism, reflecting its determination to pursue accountability through its national judicial system.
Although the legislation remained largely dormant for many years, renewed efforts to prosecute crimes committed during the 1971 war led to the establishment of the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) in 2010. The Tribunal remains Bangladesh's strongest and most significant example of implementing International Humanitarian Law. Unlike the International Criminal Court or the ad hoc tribunals established by the United Nations, the ICT is a domestic court applying Bangladeshi legislation while drawing heavily upon principles of international criminal law. Its creation represented an attempt to close a long-standing accountability gap by prosecuting those accused of committing atrocities during the Liberation War.
The Tribunal has heard numerous cases involving allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, murder, torture, rape, religious persecution, forced displacement, and other grave breaches of humanitarian law. Among its most significant judgments was Chief Prosecutor v. Abdul Quader Molla (ICT-BD Case No. 02 of 2012). Quader Molla was convicted of crimes against humanity for his role in atrocities committed during the Liberation War. Initially sentenced to life imprisonment, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court later enhanced the sentence to death after hearing appeals. The case attracted widespread public attention and demonstrated that Bangladesh was prepared to hold individuals accountable for crimes committed decades earlier. For many survivors and victims' families, the judgment represented an important step toward long-awaited justice.
Another landmark decision was Chief Prosecutor v. Delwar Hossain Sayedee (ICT-BD Case No. 01 of 2011). Sayedee was convicted of crimes against humanity committed during the 1971 conflict. Although the Supreme Court later commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment, the judgment reaffirmed the principle that those accused of genocide and crimes against humanity could be prosecuted under Bangladeshi law regardless of the passage of time. Together, these cases established the ICT as a significant domestic institution for enforcing International Humanitarian Law and demonstrated Bangladesh's willingness to confront its painful wartime history through judicial proceedings rather than political compromise.
Beyond criminal prosecutions, the Tribunal has played an important symbolic role. Its proceedings have documented witness testimony, historical evidence, and judicial findings relating to the atrocities committed during the Liberation War. These records contribute to preserving historical memory and help counter attempts to deny or distort the events of 1971. For many Bangladeshis, the Tribunal represents not only a legal institution but also a national effort to recognise the suffering of victims and reinforce the principle that grave violations of humanitarian law must not go unpunished.
Bangladesh's commitment to International Humanitarian Law extends beyond the courtroom. As one of the world's largest contributors to United Nations peacekeeping operations, Bangladesh has integrated humanitarian law into military education and operational training. Members of the Bangladesh Armed Forces receive instruction on the Geneva Conventions, the protection of civilians, the principles of distinction and proportionality, and the lawful use of force before deployment to conflict-affected regions. Institutions such as the Bangladesh Institute of Peace Support Operation Training (BIPSOT) play an important role in preparing peacekeepers to operate in accordance with international humanitarian standards. This commitment has strengthened Bangladesh's reputation as a responsible contributor to global peacekeeping missions.
Bangladesh has also promoted International Humanitarian Law through cooperation with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the Bangladesh Red Crescent Society, universities, and military training institutions, raising awareness among judges, lawyers, armed forces personnel, and students. However, its implementation has faced criticism, particularly regarding the International Crimes Tribunal. International observers have questioned aspects of its procedures, including fair trial guarantees, defence rights, and the use of the death penalty, which is not imposed by modern international criminal courts. While the government maintains that the Tribunal operates in accordance with domestic law and constitutional requirements, critics continue to call for greater alignment with evolving international legal standards.
The writer is an advocate, High Court
