STARVATION AS A METHOD OF WARFARE IN "YARMOUK CAMP" SIEGE IN SYRIA: A PERSPECTIVE OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

Abstract

In 2012, the Syrian Government besieged Yarmouk Camp during the Civil War to drive out rebellious forces. The Syrian Forces prohibit the entry of food, water, medical supplies, and other objects that are indispensable to people’s survival. Nearly 200 people died from starvation and untreatable wounds and diseases. It was only until early 2014; the siege was loosening for a bit, enough for food parcels from humanitarian relief organization to enter the area. Sick and wounded people were also allowed to receive medical treatment. The use of starvation as the method of war is prohibited under the Geneva Convention of 1949, specifically in article 54 (1) of the Addition Protocol I and article 14 of the Protocol II. However, its use under non-international armed conflict is not regulated in the Rome Statute, making it almost impossible to bring the case to ICC. Moreover, the current political climate of Syria makes it impossible to prosecute war criminals using its own criminal law, eliminating the choice of domestic court and hybrid court. Therefore, Ad Hoc Tribunal is the most possible court to prosecute war criminals responsible for intentional starvation as it can constitute intentional starvation as its jurisdiction by using customary laws of armed conflict. Ad Hoc Tribunal will face no problem to prosecute war criminals who are mostly consists of Syrian leaders, such as the president Bashar Al-Assad and other superiors and military commanders. Unfortunately, the Security Council will need to pass a resolution to establish ad hoc tribunals, which is almost impossible due to possible vetoes by Syrian allies, Russia and China. This research aims to discuss starvation under International Humanitarian Law and to provide solution of how war criminals responsible for starvation in Yarmouk can be brought to fair criminal justice which conforms to international standards. This research is a legal doctrinal study using statutory approach and case approach.