The two fundamental issues in the investigation of an armed conflict were addressed. The first is: What is the status of conflict? Which law of armed conflict/international humanitarian law (LOAC/IHL), if any, applies to the conflict under consideration? This issue is not always as easy or as clean to solve as one would like. The second question: What is the individual status of the parties to the conflict? What can they do legally, what should they not do and what rights and guarantees are they entitled to if they are captured? While the second issue is generally easier to resolve, it also has grey areas, especially in a „war on terror.” Ambiguity and complete lack of clarity are characteristics of all types of law, but not only of LOAC/IHL. IHL is both simple and complex in terms of its objectives that underpin the principles and challenges associated with it: military necessity, with distinction, proportionality, humanity (sometimes called unnecessary suffering) and honour (sometimes called chivalry) are the five most frequently cited principles of international humanitarian law that govern the legal use of force in armed conflict. At the end of a conflict, those who have committed or ordered a violation of martial law, particularly atrocities, may be held individually responsible for war crimes through judicial proceedings. Nations that have signed the Geneva Conventions are also required to seek out and punish anyone who has committed or ordered certain „grave violations” of the laws of war. (Third Geneva Convention, Articles 129 and 130.) Interpretations of international humanitarian law change over time, which also affects martial law. Distinction is a principle of international humanitarian law that governs the legal use of force in armed conflict, according to which warring parties must distinguish between combatants and civilians. [a] [20] Honor is a principle that requires a certain degree of fairness and mutual respect among adversaries. The parties to the conflict must accept that their right to take means of mutual violation is not unlimited, they must refrain from exploiting the opponent`s respect for the law by falsely claiming the protection of the law, and they must recognize that they are members of a common profession that fights not out of personal hostility but on behalf of their respective States. [21] During a conflict, punishment for violating the laws of war may consist of a specific, intentional and limited violation of martial law in retaliation. There are certain aspects that IHL does not regulate.
For example, it does not prohibit the use of force per se, nor does it prohibit the purpose of a conflict, nor does it protect all persons affected by armed conflict, in particular combatants who are directly involved in hostilities and who may legitimately be killed. We know what constitutes LOAC/IHL. We also know, as far as we know, under what circumstances they apply and do not apply. There is another important issue for the TCA framework: the basic concepts of TCA. Just as every conflict has a status and each battlefield player has an individual status, every incident on the battlefield can be reviewed for consistency with the four basic concepts of the DCA.