Skip to main content
es
Close

V-P-NG-E-00345.JPG

During the last decade, attacks against hospitals have been a hallmark of almost every conflict. What humanitarian medical practitioners have witnessed and denounced for years has become alarmingly routine. International humanitarian law (IHL) is sometimes criticized for failing to protect the very purpose that justified its own existence, particularly when the states responsible for its enforcement remain incapable or unwilling to stand up for the protection of medical facilities in armed conflicts. In this post, Claude Maon, Legal Director for Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), highlights the need to build consensus around the specific protection of the medical mission under IHL. She calls for good faith interpretation in applying these rules to ensure the effective protection of hospitals by all actors in real situations of attack. In doing so, she underscores that attacks on hospitals are not inevitable and argues that this persistent trend of violations can only be reversed if states respect the law by adopting good operational practices to protect the medical mission, alongside ensuring accountability for attacks affecting medical facilities in armed conflict.

Guerre du Biafra. Arochuku. Bombardement de l'hôpital général. Biafra conflict. Arochuku. Bombing general hospital.

Share this article