THE ISSUE OF TERRORISM IN THE INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

Terrorism has always been present in the history of humanity in various forms (most often assassinations), but only recently it grew in importance and visibility. The 9/11 events in 2001 set new limits in the activity of the terrorist groups, but also in the possibilities to tackle them and fight back. In the past years, the terrorist groups have relinquished any type of humanitarian interdiction, purposely committing attacks that resulted in a large number of civilian victims. Until now, it has been impossible to issue an unanimously accepted definition of terrorism because of the complexity of the phenomenon and the divergent stances and interests of the authors. The absence of such a definition creates problems in the judicial and legal approach of the phenomenon. Although we refer to the fight against terrorism as “war on terrorism”, there is a major difference from a classical conflict, in which the parties have the statute of belligerents. The military operations against terrorism are not considered conventional armed conflicts. The peril state induced by terrorism has determined numerous countries to depart from the principles of human rights by limiting some of them while implementing measures to prevent and combat terrorism. The adoption of certain rules, many times restrictive, has had as secondary major effect the limitation and violation of the fundamental rights and liberties of the citizens. The international treaties allow the restriction of some rights under well-determined circumstances, but it is not recommended to use them systematically and extensively. Furthermore, the legislation adopted by numerous states to fight terrorism led to the significant increase of the surveillance and investigative capabilities of the institutions authorized to fight terrorism, in detriment of the civil liberties. The UN has constantly declared that the fight against terrorism should take into consideration the respect of human rights.