Yes, India is bound by International Humanitarian Law (IHL), particularly the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which are the cornerstone of IHL. India’s Status under the Geneva Conventions: India is a State Party to all four Geneva Conventions of 1949. India ratified them on 9 November 1950. These conventions apply during armed conflicts, including international wars and conflicts involving occupation. The Four Geneva Conventions India is bound by: 1. GC I – Protection of wounded and sick soldiers on land 2. GC II – Protection of wounded, sick, and shipwrecked members of armed forces at sea 3. GC III – Treatment of prisoners of war 4. GC IV – Protection of civilians during war India has not ratified the Additional Protocols (1977): Additional Protocol I (relating to international armed conflicts) – Not ratified Additional Protocol II (relating to non-international armed conflicts) – Not ratified Additional Protocol III (2005 – emblem) – Not ratified So, India follows only the original Geneva Conventions (1949) and not the later protocols. Domestic Application: While India does not have a separate law exclusively codifying the Geneva Conventions, their principles are: Reflected in military manuals and rules of engagement Considered part of customary international law, binding even without domestic legislation Recognized by Indian courts in various decisions, particularly in matters of prisoner of war, civilian protection, and human rights in conflict zones Examples of Application: India–Pakistan wars: Both countries agreed to treat POWs as per Geneva Convention III. Kargil Conflict (1999): India observed Geneva rules regarding treatment of captured Pakistani soldiers. Terrorism and insurgency: Though not bound by Additional Protocol II, India largely respects IHL norms in internal conflicts, with exceptions. Conclusion: Yes, India is bound by international humanitarian law through the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and is expected to apply them during armed conflicts. However, India has not ratified the Additional Protocols of 1977, and does not yet have a dedicated IHL enforcement law. Despite this, the core principles of IHL are respected and followed in practice, especially by the Indian Armed Forces.

Dear Client, India is a signatory to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 1. Ratification and Domestic Legislation: Ratification and Enactment:. Ratification of the Conventions: India signed onto the 1949 Geneva Conventions on 9th November 1950. That which saw India join these treaties also put it in agreement to the terms of the conventions that put forward to care for the well being of individuals during wartime. The Geneva Conventions Act, 1960: To this effect the Indian Parliament passed the Geneva Conventions Act of 1960. This law which outlaws what are termed as grave breaches of the Conventions which include willful killing, torture and inhuman treatment of protected persons. Also the Act sets up a framework for prosecution of any individual regardless of their national affiliation which is found to have committed these crimes in or out of India. What is put forth in this domestic law is a display of India’s commitment to the enforcement of human rights. 2. The Scope of the Conventions: What does the Conventions cover: First Convention: Includes the treatment of injured and sick military personnel. Second Convention: Protects service members who are injured or ill, or which die at sea. Third Convention: Governs the issue of prisoners of war (POWs). This is the which comes up the most in the case of conflicts. Fourth Convention: Includes protection of civilian populations which in turn is to include those in occupied territories. 3. The Additional Protocols: While India signed the 1949 Conventions it has a more complex position on the 1977 Additional Protocols. Protocol I is a framework which deals with the protection of victims in international armed conflicts. Protocol II is on the issue of protection of victims in internal conflicts. India has not signed to those Additional Protocols. In the past India put forth that it’s domestic laws and constitution are enough for these issues and that some of the Protocol’s elements may in fact be used to pass judgement on how a country handles its internal security affairs. Many of the Protocol’s ideas have in fact become what is known to be custom in international law in which India is expected to participate. I hope that these answers help you with your queries. Go ahead to ask if you have more. Thank you!

Dear Client, Yes, India is a party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions. India’s in it’s effort to live by these basic tenets of International Humanitarian Law does so through a two part process:. Ratification: India signed into law the original Geneva Conventions in 1950. In that act, India agreed to be bound by the terms of these treaties which it saw out to also cover issues related to the treatment of the wounded and sick, prisoners of war, and civilians during times of war. Also included in the scope of these treaties is care for private and military medical facilities and equipment. Domestic Legislation: To inforce these international treaties at home the Indian Parliament passed the Geneva Conventions Act, 1960. This act brings the spirit of the conventions into the fabric of Indian law. What this means is that should a violation of the conventions take place the perpetrator can be taken to an Indian court for that which which goes against the act. This dual strategy of ratification and also putting in place domestic legislation what we see is that India has made its commitment to the conventions legal in the international as well as the domestic sphere. Important Nuance: Additional Agreements. India is a party to the 1949 four but has not ratified the 1977 two Additional Protocols. Protocol I extends the protections which apply to victims of international armed conflicts. Protocol II also includes provisions for victims of non-international armed conflicts (civil wars). India hasn’t signed onto these protocols which means it is not legally tied to their details. Also India has put forth that which of the protocols’ articles which many of them it sees as a matter of custom in international law or which don’t align with its national security policies. This is a large issue to consider in the context of India’s full association with International Humanitarian Law. I wish that this response helps you out with your queries. Should you have any issues please do not hesitate to ask. Thank you.