International law has developed a comprehensive normative framework to safeguard civilian populations during armed conflicts and military occupations. This framework is grounded in a body of universal treaties, customary norms, and widely accepted principles of international humanitarian law (hereinafter – IHL). The foundation of these regulations includes, in particular, the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, the Hague Conventions, as well as relevant resolutions of international organizations.

1. Legal analysis of the provisions of international humanitarian law in the context of the situation of Ukrainian citizens staying in the territories occupied by Russia.

One of the fundamental principles of IHL is the principle of distinction, which requires parties to an armed conflict to clearly differentiate between combatants and civilians, as well as between military and civilian objects. Hostilities may only be directed against lawful military targets, while civilians and civilian infrastructure are afforded general protection from attack. This protection also extends to the natural environment and facilities critical to the survival of the humankind.

Furthermore, international humanitarian law provides enhanced legal protection to specific categories of civilians, including individuals who are under the authority of a party to the conflict but are not its nationals, as well as nationals of neutral states who find themselves in occupied territories. These individuals are entitled to humane treatment without any discrimination based on race, nationality, language, religion, social origin, or political beliefs. Torture, cruel or degrading treatment, collective punishment, sexual violence, and other forms of abuse are strictly prohibited, as they constitute grave violations of international humanitarian law.

In international law, military occupation is defined as a situation in which a foreign state exercises effective, though temporary, control over part of another state's territory during an international armed conflict. The presence or absence of armed resistance is not decisive in determining whether a situation qualifies as an occupation. What is essential is that international law clearly distinguishes military occupation from unlawful forms of territorial acquisition, particularly aggression or annexation, which do not constitute a legitimate basis for claiming sovereignty.

Read more