After reviewing the provisions of international humanitarian law relating to water, the author offers some thoughts on the nature of the legal protection accorded this resource in time of war. The lack of a proper and autonomous legal framework for protecting water would appear to be explained, on the one hand, by the many roles that water can play — for example, as a weapon, target or victim — and, on the other, by the very manner in which it is treated in international humanitarian law. Water is taken into account only in connection with that body of law's basic objectives of protecting victims of war and regulating the conduct of hostilities — and even then only in its capacity as one of man's basic needs, or as a danger, or as part of the natural environment. Water as such is not given legal protection. This arrangement may be inadequate, but it is enough to serve as a firm basis for improvement. In view of research carried out recently on international rules on the use of water in peacetime, a fresh look should be taken at the status of water in the law of armed conflict. A better understanding of the issue's complexities will mean better protection for “blue gold”.

This article focusses on the issue of fundamental standards of humanity, a set of principles to reflect both international human rights and humanitarian law, as a means to address the insufficient protection of persons in situations of internal violence. Such fundamental standards of humanity, applicable at all times, in all circumstances and to all parties, are necessary to address four areas: 1) States are not party to international instruments; 2) human rights obligations are derogated from; 3) international humanitarian law is not applicable or is so but is not applied; and 4) non-state actors may not be bound by obligations under international law. The article provides an overview of the steps taken by the international community to address the issue, discusses the sources of international human rights law, humanitarian law and refugee law from which fundamental standards of humanity could be drawn, and suggests further steps to be taken. The authors are convinced that fundamental standards of humanity would serve as an educational tool to enhance effective implementation of relevant international law.

The defence of superior orders would appear to be a relatively easy concept to define. Despite its apparent simplicity, however, it causes more confusion among legal experts than one would think. In fact, this defence is based on obedience to the orders of a government or a superior, whether military or civilian. Some people consider it as a justification, others as a mitigating circumstance, others yet as both. In the opinion of the author the debate is purely theoretical, however, since in practice the defence of superior orders is no longer used on its own.