A Case Study on the Protection of Cultural Property Under the Law of Armed Conflict: Russia-Ukraine War

This study provides a comprehensive examination of impacts and repercussions of Russian-Ukranian war on the protection of cultural property under international humanitarian law. In this regard, the study first analyzes the significance of cultural property prior to outlining how states identify these properties. Thereafter, it evaluates the role and enforceability of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV on the Protection of Civilian Persons in Times of War, which governs the protection of cultural property in international humanitarian law. Since the 1949 Geneva Convention IV classifies cultural properties as civilian objects, they are therefore entitled to the protective regime offered by the Convention-not as cultural properties, but as civilian objects. Following that, the applicability of the 1977 Additional Protocol I's regime for protecting cultural property to the Russian-Ukranian war in the context of an international armed conflict is also discussed herein. The underlying reason is that the 1954 Hague Convention is the first in international law to provide exclusive protection for cultural property. The principle of military necessity is included as an exception in the 1954 Hague Convention and constitutes the weakness of the Convention. By addressing this exception, it was concluded that Russia damaged and destroyed the cultural property of Ukraine in violation of the requirements of the principle of military necessity. Last but not least, the 1999 Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention has undergone an examination herein with a focus on settling issues with the Convention's military necessity exception.