Internment by non-State armed groups : Legal and practical complexities
MC Meetei *
Internment and detention by non-State armed groups (NSAGs) represent some of the most challenging legal and humanitarian issues in contemporary non-international armed conflicts (NIACs). These practices, widespread across conflict zones globally, are fraught with instances of arbitrary detention, inadequate conditions, and violations of international humanitarian law (IHL).
Understanding the legal framework governing such actions and the humanitarian concerns they raise is imperative for addressing their implications and ensuring better compliance with IHL principles.
The Legal Framework for Detention by Non-State Armed Groups
Detention – by States and non-State armed groups (NSAGs) – is a reality in armed conflict. In 2021, the ICRC estimated that over 145 armed groups were holding detainees. It occurs under circumstances that vary from the detention of small numbers of adversary combatants to large-scale internment of civilians.
Notably, IHL does not categorically prohibit detention by NSAGs; rather, it assumes that all parties to a conflict will detain individuals as part of military operations. Consequently, IHL sets out limitations and procedures to govern detention practices to avoid abuse and arbitrariness.
A critical provision in this context is Common Article 3 of the Four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which outlines minimum standards of humane treatment. Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions, applicable to NIACs, also provides further procedural and substantive safeguards. For instance, it prohibits arbitrary detention, which is defined under customary IHL as any detention carried out without a legitimate legal basis or regulatory framework.
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) plays a pivotal role in interpreting and disseminating IHL standards related to detention. Its 2024 Challenges Report emphasises the need for NSAGs to establish clear grounds and procedures for internment to avoid arbitrary practices.
Grounds and Procedures for Internment
Under IHL, internment is an exceptional measure that must be justified on a case-by-case basis. The ICRC underlines that NSAGs should adopt a codified framework—such as a code of conduct or set of rules—detailing the legitimate grounds for internment and procedural safeguards. These grounds generally include individuals posing imperative security threats, such as combatants, spies, or those actively supporting adversary forces.
However, unlawful grounds for internment persist. For example, individuals cannot be detained solely for their familial ties to adversaries, political ideologies, or provision of non-combat support such as food or medical aid. Such practices constitute violations of IHL and undermine the principle of necessity central to lawful detention.
The lack of procedural safeguards compounds the issue of arbitrary detention. Detainees are often left in legal limbo, unaware of the reasons for their internment or the duration. The ICRC recommends mechanisms such as independent review boards to regularly assess the necessity of continued detention. However, the implementation of such reviews by NSAGs remains sparse due to resource constraints and operational limitations.
Humanitarian Concerns and Violations
The humanitarian impact of detention by NSAGs is profound. Detainees often face poor living conditions characterised by congestion, insufficient food, lack of medical care, and exposure to violence and abuse. These conditions are aggravated by the absence of oversight mechanisms and judicial review, leaving detainees entirely dependent on their captors.
Furthermore, specific groups—such as women, children, and the elderly—are particularly vulnerable to mistreatment. Reports have documented cases of sexual violence, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings perpetrated against detainees held by NSAGs. These practices not only violate IHL but may also constitute war crimes under international criminal law.
The recent killing of six innocent civilians, including women, children, and an 8-month-old infant, after being held hostage for five days on 15 November 2024—now referred to as the Jakuradhor Massacre—by Kuki mercenaries in the Jiribam District of Manipur, India, stands as a glaring example of war crimes.
The stress and anxiety experienced by detainees are intensified when they are held without clear information about their status or recourse to legal remedies. Families of detainees also endure severe emotional and financial hardships, often compounded by a lack of communication or information about the detainees’ well-being.
Challenges in Ensuring Compliance
Ensuring NSAGs compliance with IHL poses significant challenges. Unlike state actors, NSAGs often lack the administrative capacity and resources to implement procedural safeguards. Their motivations and operational contexts vary widely, further complicating the enforcement of standardised norms.
The ICRC has sought to address these challenges through direct engagement with NSAGs, emphasising the benefits of adhering to IHL principles for gaining legitimacy and support from local populations. The organisation’s operational dialogue with NSAGs often includes leveraging religious laws and local cus- toms to align detention practices with humanitarian standards.
Role of Supporting States and International Actors
States that support or partner with NSAGs bear a legal responsibility to prevent and address arbitrary detention practices. This responsibility extends to ensuring that their partners comply with IHL through capacity-building initiatives, training programs, and conditional support mechanisms.
The ICRC’s recommendations for supporting states include fostering respect for detainees’ rights and facilitating the implementation of safeguards. Accordingly, India is accountable for the war crimes perpetrated in Manipur by the Kuki NSAGs under the Suspension of Operation (SoO) Pact with the Government of India.
The SoO, being a political pact implying a ceasefire, obligates both parties to adhere to the principles of IHL, including the protection of civilians and their properties, prohibition of targeting non-combatants, and prevention of indiscriminate violence, regardless of the operational context.
Moreover, impartial humanitarian organisations like the ICRC play a vital role in advocating for humane treatment of detainees. Their work includes monitoring detention conditions, providing material assistance, and engaging in dialogue to ensure compliance with IHL.
Towards Ending Arbitrary Detention
Ending arbitrary detention by NSAGs requires a multifaceted approach that prioritises the dignity and rights of detainees. Key measures include
1. Establishing Legal Frameworks: NSAGs must codify clear rules and procedures governing detention practices.
2. Implementing Procedural Safeguards: Regular reviews, transparency, and opportunities for detainees to challenge their internment are essential.
3. International Support and Monitoring: States and humanitarian organisations should collaborate to enhance compliance and accountability.
4. Advocacy and Awareness: Raising awareness about IHL standards among NSAGs, communities, and international stakeholders is crucial for long-term change.
Conclusion
Internment by NSAGs stresses the complex interplay between legal norms, humanitarian concerns, and the realities of armed conflict. While IHL provides a framework for regulating detention practices, achieving full compliance remains a formidable challenge.
Strengthened engagement by international actors and regional humanitarian organisations, coupled with a commitment to procedural safeguards and humane treatment, can mitigate the suffering of detainees and uphold the principles of IHL in NIACs.
Views are writer’s own.
* MC Meetei wrote this article for The Sangai Express
The writer is a Coordinator of Manipur International Youth Centre.
He can be reached at mcbm17(AT)gmail(DOT)com
This article was webcasted on January 19 2025.
* Comments posted by users in this discussion thread and other parts of this site are opinions of the individuals posting them (whose user ID is displayed alongside) and not the views of e-pao.net. We strongly recommend that users exercise responsibility, sensitivity and caution over language while writing your opinions which will be seen and read by other users. Please read a complete Guideline on using comments on this website.