1

USMANU DAN FODIYO UNIVERSITY, SOKOTO.

FACULTY OF LAW

GROUP 4 PRESENTATION:

COURSE CODE & TITLE: LAW 212 (PUBLIC

INTERNATIONAL LAW II)

TOPIC:
The Effect of Armed Conflict on Private Rights and
International Obligations.
Examine the consequences of war on individuals, private
contracts, ongoing actions, and the fate of international
treaties. Use examples from Ukraine (refugees, broken
business contracts, ICC
jurisdiction), Sudan’s civil war (treaty violations,
displacement), or Afghanistan. Discuss the legal status of
treaty suspensions.
 2
S/N NAMES ADMISSION NUMBERS

01 MUHAMMED MUFIDA BWARI 2310500035

02 FARUK BILKIS 2310500036

03 ADAMU ABDULAZIZ 2310500038

04 OYELOWO KHALID OLAYINKA 2310500039

05 ABDFATAH MUHAMMED OLAMILEKAN 2310500040

06 AJIBOLA ZAINAB AYOKU 2310500041

07 ABDUR-RAFIU ABDUS-SAMAD 2310500042

08 ABDULKAREEM ABDULMAJEED BOLAKALE 2310500043

09 ISAH AISHA ALI 2310500044

10 IBRAHIM YUSROH GBEMISOLA 2310500045

 3
INTRODUCTION

Armed conflicts in the international community have long exhibited menacing and
challenges in the globe, exerting wide-ranging and mostly devastating effects on private
rights and the fulfilment of international obligations. These repercussions extend beyond
the immediate destruction of life and property, reaching deeply into the legal and
contractual frameworks that are made to ensure the protection of individual rights,
private agreements and also ensure the implementation and continuity of ongoing legal
proceedings. Moreover, the strains of war frequently place international treaties,
designed to safeguard rights and ensure compliance with global obligations, under
severe pressure, testing both their resilience and the political will of states to uphold
them.

This research is aimed at critically examining the consequences of war on individuals,

private contracts, ongoing actions, and the fate of international treaties. In doing so, we
will provide clear definitions and conceptual clarifications of key terms namely armed
conflict, private rights, and international obligations to establish a precise analytical
framework to aid the readers’ understanding. Such foundational clarity is essential to
ensure that the subsequent analysis is grounded in universally understood legal
concepts, thereby enabling a coherent exploration of how war disrupts both private legal
relationships and the collective commitments of states under international law.

This study will also explore the principal legal frameworks established to regulate the
conduct of wars and armed conflicts, with particular attention to those designed to
safeguard private property, commercial investments, and individual rights. It will further
examine the legal frameworks aimed at preserving global security and ensuring the
observance of these protective regimes, together with the mechanisms developed to
promote state compliance with international obligations.

Towards the end, this research will focus on the manifesting effects of armed conflicts
on individuals, private contracts, ongoing actions, and the continuity or dissolution of
international treaties. It shall also feature well-selected case studies and illustrative
examples, drawn from both historical and contemporary contexts, to vividly demonstrate
how such conflicts disrupt personal rights, destabilize private agreements, hinder
ongoing actions, and place treaty obligations under severe strain.

In conclusion, the study will address the complex issue of treaty suspension, analyzing
its legal status under contemporary international law.
 4
DEFINITION OF THE SCOPE

ARMED CONFLICTS
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC, 1863) emphasizes that “armed
conflict” must be understood as a factual and legal classification determined
independently of any formal declaration of war. It applies based purely on the existence
of sustained hostilities, rather than political recognition. This ensures the enduring
applicability of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) across varied and evolving conflict
contexts.
Article 2 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, which deals exclusively with “Application of
the Convention” provides that:

“In addition to the provisions which shall be

implemented in peacetime, the present Convention shall apply to all
cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may
arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if
the state of war is not recognized by one of them.
The Convention shall also apply to all cases of partial or total
occupation of the territory of a High Contracting Party, even if the
said occupation meets with no armed resistance.
Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the
present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall
remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall
furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said
Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.”

By virtue of the above provision, International Armed Conflicts are all cases of declared
war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High
Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them

Interpretations by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) further clarify that any resort to
armed force between states, including partial or total occupation, even without armed
resistance, activates International Humanitarian Law protections.

Non-International Armed Conflict involves either hostilities between governmental forces

and organized non-State armed groups; or conflicts between such groups within a
State.

No single provision in the Geneva Conventions defines “armed conflict” outright this
omission is deliberate. It was designed to depoliticize the determination of when IHL
 5
applies, shifting focus away from formal war declarations to objective, factual analysis.
But in relation to typical examples and experiences, armed conflicts within the
international community are political confrontations that arise not only within states but
also across borders, involving both state and non-state actors in pursuit of fundamental
change. In certain instances, such conflicts take the form of secessionist movements,
often initiated by groups, frequently minorities, who resort to armed struggle either to
establish autonomy within an existing state or to create a wholly independent state.
These movements have been witnessed in diverse regions of the world. In Asia, the
case of East Timor demonstrates how protracted armed resistance culminated in
independence, while in Europe, the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia during the early
1990s led to the emergence of Slovenia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina after
violent hostilities, alongside the peaceful secession of Macedonia. Africa, though
historically less prone to successful secessionist wars, nonetheless experienced such
dynamics in Eritrea’s armed struggle for independence from Ethiopia. Despite these
notable examples, the fragmentation of states through armed secessionist conflict
remains relatively rare on the global stage, though ethnic identity and political exclusion
continue to act as catalysts for violence in various regions.

PRIVATE RIGHTS
Under international law, private rights refer to the legal entitlements of individuals and
non-state entities (such as corporations), as opposed to the obligations and relations
between states. These rights encompass aspects like privacy, property, contract
enforcement, and civil liberties.

An example of this is Right to Privacy.

The right to privacy, often tied to notions of personal and family life, home, and
correspondence, has been recognized as fundamental in international human rights
instruments. In the European context, Article 8 of the European Convention on Human
Rights protects the right to respect for private and family life, subject to lawful and
necessary restrictions in a democratic society.

At the global level, Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR) explicitly safeguards privacy, while other provisions ensure privacy overlaps
with freedoms of movement, belief, and minority rights.

In summary, private rights, in the international community context, refer to the legal
entitlements of individuals and private entities, such as the right to privacy, property, and
enforcement of legal claims, across national borders. These rights are protected and
supported by ICCPR, ECHR, IHL, Human Rights Laws, etc
 6
INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS
International obligations refer to legal duties voluntarily assumed by states (and
occasionally other international actors) under international law. These obligations are
derived primarily from:

Treaties: These are agreements which create binding commitments between signatory
states. For example, adherence to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or the Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties illustrates how treaty obligations structure state
behavior.
Customary International Law: This consists of established state practices and a belief
in their legal necessity (opinio juris), such as the prohibition of torture or genocide.
Erga Omnes obligations: Duties owed by states towards the entire international
community, such as prohibitions on genocide or slavery.

However, these international obligations are governed by some key principles like
“pacta sunt servanda” (agreements must be kept) and state responsibility.

Some of these obligations include:

1.​ Obligation to prevent and punish genocide: The United Nations, through the
Genocide Convention of 1948, imposes on states a binding duty to prevent
genocide and to prosecute individuals responsible for committing it. This
obligation applies both in times of war and in peacetime, reflecting the
peremptory nature of the prohibition of genocide under international law. The
International Court of Justice (ICJ) has affirmed this obligation in cases such as
Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro (2007), emphasizing that all
states must take proactive measures to prevent and punish genocide,
irrespective of their direct involvement.

2.​ Obligation to uphold Humanitarian Law in armed conflict: The International

Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), under the authority of the Geneva
Conventions of 1949, ensures compliance with international humanitarian law.
States are obligated to protect civilians, wounded combatants, and prisoners of
war, and to refrain from targeting medical facilities and other protected persons or
property.

3.​ Obligation to protect human rights: The United Nations through the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and International Covenants on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966) and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
(ICESCR, 1966) places obligations on states to respect, protect, and fulfill the
 7
fundamental rights of individuals. These obligations include safeguarding the
right to life, dignity, equality, and freedom from torture or arbitrary detention.

4.​ Obligation to ensure international peace and security: The United Nations
Charter (1945), particularly Chapter VII, imposes a binding obligation on states to
refrain from the use or threat of force against the territorial integrity or political
independence of any state.

5.​ Obligation to protect refugees: Under the 1951 Refugee Convention an, states
are obligated to grant protection to persons fleeing persecution and to uphold the
principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning refugees to a territory
where they may face serious threats to their life or freedom. The United Nations
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) supervises the application of these
obligations, ensuring that vulnerable individuals are afforded international
protection and humanitarian assistance.

LEGAL FRAMEWORKS

The regulation of armed conflict and the protection of private rights and international
obligations are firmly embedded in the corpus of international law. Over the past
century, the international community has developed an elaborate body of legal
instruments and customary rules to govern both the conduct of hostilities and the
preservation of rights in times of peace and war. These frameworks range from the
United Nations Charter, which lays down the principles of peace and security, to the
Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, which constitute the backbone of
International Humanitarian Law, with others such as International Human Rights Law,
Refugee Law, and International Criminal Law. In addition, general rules of treaty
provisions and customary international law continue to regulate the status of
international obligations during armed conflicts. Collectively, these legal instruments
form an interwoven system designed not only to mitigate the destructive consequences
of war but also to ensure that fundamental rights and obligations retain their force within
the international community.

The United Nations Charter (1945)

The UN Charter serves as the cornerstone of modern international law, establishing the
principles of sovereign equality, the prohibition of the use of force, and the collective
responsibility to maintain international peace and security. Article 2(4) explicitly prohibits
the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any
state, while Chapter VII empowers the Security Council to authorize enforcement
 8
measures. This framework defines the legal boundaries within which armed conflicts
must be addressed at the international level.

International Humanitarian Law (Geneva Conventions, 1949 and Additional

Protocols, 1977)
International humanitarian law (IHL), primarily codified in the Geneva Conventions of
1949 and their Additional Protocols, constitutes the legal framework governing the
conduct of hostilities. These instruments impose obligations on states and armed
groups to protect civilians, medical personnel, prisoners of war, and cultural property.
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) functions as the guardian of IHL,
ensuring compliance and advocating for humanitarian principles even in the midst of
armed conflict.

International Human Rights Law

Apart from International Humanitarian Law, International Human Rights Law provides an
essential framework for the protection of individuals during both peace and conflict.
Instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), and the International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966) create obligations for states
to uphold fundamental rights regardless of the existence of armed conflict.

The Genocide Convention (1948) and International Criminal Law

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948)
imposes obligations on states to prevent and punish genocide, a norm of jus cogens
character. Complementing this, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
(1998) establishes jurisdiction over genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and
the crime of aggression. This framework reflects the evolution of international criminal
law, ensuring accountability for grave violations committed during armed conflicts.

The Law of Treaties (Vienna Convention, 1969)

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) regulates the conclusion,
interpretation, and suspension of treaties. During armed conflicts, questions often arise
concerning the status of existing treaties, particularly regarding suspension or
termination. Articles 60 and 62 of the VCLT provide guidance on material breaches and
fundamental changes of circumstances, offering a legal framework for analyzing the fate
of international treaties in times of war.
 9
CONSEQUENCES OF WAR

Armed conflict, international or non-international, generates fatal disruptions across

legal, economic, and social spheres. Its consequences are not limited to hostilities but
extend thoroughly into the lives of individuals, the stability of private contracts, the
continuity of judicial and commercial actions, and the validity of international treaties.
Modern conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and Afghanistan illustrate the widespread reach of
war into these domains: the displacement of millions of individuals as refugees and
internally displaced persons, the collapse of private business contracts and investment
flows, the disruption of ongoing judicial and arbitral actions, and treaty suspension.

EFFECTS ON INDIVIDUALS
Armed conflicts inflict their deadliest effect on civilians, undermining fundamental rights
and freedoms safeguarded under international humanitarian law and international
human rights law. Nevertheless, some legal frameworks provide for their protection. Yet,
in practice, conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and Afghanistan reveal recurring violations
against vulnerable groups, journalists, persons with disabilities, children, and refugees,
manifesting in widespread civilian harm and forced displacement.

●​ Journalists remain one of the most directly endangered civilian groups in armed
conflicts. In the Russian/Ukraine war, UNESCO reported that by mid-2023, at
least 14 journalists were killed and more than dozens were detained or injured
while covering the war. In Sudan's Civil War, media houses were raided, and
journalists were harassed and detained by both the Sudanese Armed Forces and
the Rapid Support Forces. This effectively silenced independent reporting. In
Afghanistan, following the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, over 200 media
outlets were shut down, and journalists faced censorship, arbitrary arrests, and
violence. These attacks not only endanger lives but also restrict the right to
information protected under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966).
●​ Persons with disabilities face severe consequences in war. According to the UN
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), many people with
disabilities in Ukraine were left trapped in their homes during bombardments due
to inaccessible evacuation routes. Humanitarian agencies reported widespread
shortages of medicine and assistive devices, worsening suffering for this
vulnerable group. In Afghanistan, armed conflict has left more than 800,000
people living with war-related disabilities, particularly from landmines and
improvised explosive devices. Sudan’s ongoing conflict has similarly worsened
access to healthcare for persons with disabilities, with displacement camps often
lacking basic support systems. According to the Convention on the Rights of
 10
Persons with Disabilities (CRPD, 2006), states are obligated to ensure equal
access to humanitarian relief and safeguard the dignity of persons with
disabilities, even during armed conflict.
●​ Children are among the vulnerable victims of armed conflicts, suffering both
direct violence and long-term deprivation. UNICEF documented over 1,000
children killed and injured in Ukraine in the first year of Russia’s invasion, while
thousands more were displaced and subjected to unlawful transfers across
borders. In Sudan, the UN reported cases of child recruitment by armed groups,
sexual violence, and attacks on schools, all constituting “grave violations” under
the UN Monitoring and Reporting Mechanism. Afghanistan has one of the world’s
highest rates of children affected by war, with many of recruitment of child
soldiers and severe restrictions on girls’ education under the Taliban regime.
These abuses contravene the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC, 1989)
and its Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict, which
prohibit recruitment, ensure special protection, and safeguard access to
education even in conflict zones.
●​ Refugees: War generates massive refugee flows that burden neighboring states
and strain the international protection regime. In Ukraine, more than 6 million
refugees fled to Europe following the 2022 invasion, creating the continent’s
largest refugee crisis since World War II (UNHCR, 2023). Sudan’s civil war has
driven over 1.5 million people into neighboring countries like Chad and South
Sudan, while more remained displaced internally. Afghanistan has produced one
of the world’s largest stranded refugee populations, with more than 2.5 million
Afghan refugees registered in Pakistan and Iran, and countless others
undocumented. Refugee protection is provided for in the 1951 Refugee
Convention and its 1967 Protocol, which enshrine the principle of
non-refoulement, i.e., the prohibition against returning refugees to danger.
However, inadequate resources, border closures, and politicized asylum policies
frequently undermine these obligations in practice.
●​ Widespread Civilian Harm: Civilians suffer indiscriminate violence, destruction of
livelihoods, and psychological trauma during armed conflicts. In Ukraine, the UN
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights recorded over 9,000 civilian
deaths in the first 18 months of the conflict. Civilian infrastructure such as
hospitals, schools, etc. has been repeatedly targeted, leaving millions without
essential services. Sudanese civilians have suffered starvation as a weapon of
war, as humanitarian access has been deliberately blocked in dominated areas.
In Afghanistan, decades of aerial bombings and insurgent attacks have made
civilians the overwhelming victims of hostilities. These acts contravene Article 51
of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (1977), which prohibits
targeting civilians and mandates the principle of distinction between combatants
 11
and non-combatants. Yet, repeated violations highlight the weakness of
enforcement mechanisms.
●​ Forced displacement, another devastating consequences of war, forcefully
removing affected communities from their homes. In Ukraine, over 5 million
people are internally displaced, living in temporary shelters or host communities
under precarious conditions. Sudan’s conflict has displaced more than 4 million
people internally, with camps lacking access to food, clean water, and medical
services. Afghanistan continues to see cyclical waves of displacement, both
internal and cross-border, as insecurity and economic collapse deepen. Forced
displacement violates fundamental human rights, including the right to adequate
housing and security of person, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (1948) and reinforced under the Guiding Principles on Internal
Displacement (1998). Despite these normative protections, displacement
remains an inescapable humanitarian consequence of modern armed conflicts.

EFFECTS ON PRIVATE CONTRACTS

Armed conflicts destabilize economic life by frustrating private contracts, often making
performance impossible, illegal, or commercially meaningless. The effects manifest in
several connected sectors, from trade and investment contracts to construction, supply
chains, and international arbitration.

●​ Commercial Supply Contracts: Wars regularly interrupt the movement of goods

and services, destroying commercial supply chains. In Ukraine, the Russian
blockade of Black Sea ports left grain exporters unable to meet delivery
contracts, causing global food insecurity. Similar disruptions occurred in Sudan,
where insecurity on trade routes prevented goods from reaching markets. Such
breakdowns engage the doctrine of force majeure or impossibility of
performance, whereby a party may be excused if extraordinary circumstances
beyond their control make fulfillment impossible. International commercial law,
including arbitral practice under the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC),
has consistently recognized armed conflict as a potential force majeure event.

●​ Foreign Investment and Long-Term Contracts: Investment contracts are also

affected in wartime, as armed conflict does not regard the security of property
and capital. In Sudan, the oil industry was jeopardized by war, rendering
multinational contracts unenforceable. In Afghanistan, foreign investment
contracts negotiated under the previous government were repudiated by the
Taliban following their return to power in 2021. This raised questions about state
succession and contractual continuity.
 12
●​ Construction and Infrastructure Contracts: Wars destroy and sometimes suspend
infrastructure projects, leaving both local and international contractors unable to
perform their job. In Ukraine, ongoing construction contracts for energy, housing,
and transport projects were rendered impossible by bombardments and mass
displacement of labor.

●​ Financial and Banking Contracts: Armed conflict often causes banking systems
to collapse or become restricted by sanctions, directly affecting financial
contracts. Following the invasion of Ukraine, sanctions against Russian banks
disrupted loan agreements and cross-border transactions. Afghanistan faced a
frozen central bank and international reserves after the Taliban takeover, which
invalidated countless international financial arrangements.

EFFECTS ON ONGOING ACTIONS

What are ongoing actions?
Ongoing actions means pending or continuing legal, arbitral, administrative, and
cross-border commercial processes whose continuity or enforceability is affected by
armed conflict.

●​ Frustration of Ongoing Judicial Actions: Armed conflict frequently obstructs and

frustrates judicial proceedings by making it difficult to gather evidence, protect
witnesses, or carry out investigations in real time. In Ukraine, hostilities have
damaged judicial infrastructure and displaced legal professionals, interrupting
numerous domestic war-crime trials. Reports indicate that by late 2023, over
138,000 conflict-related crimes had been registered, yet the majority remained
pending because of practical obstacles like access to occupied territories and
lack of security for investigators. Similarly, the ICC faces difficulties in executing
its warrants, as seen with the arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir
Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, which remain unexecuted due to Russia’s refusal
to cooperate. These impediments buttress how ongoing legal actions are
impaired by armed conflict.

●​ Hindrance to Justice Dissemination: War also hinders the dissemination of justice

by preventing timely communication of legal outcomes and reducing the symbolic
effect of accountability. For example, even though the ICC has issued high-profile
arrest warrants, Russia’s insistence on non-cooperation has left these judgments
without enforcement. Moreover, Ukraine’s domestic courts, while continuing to
prosecute captured Russian soldiers, struggle to deliver verdicts with broader
international visibility because proceedings are often delayed or conducted in
absentia.
 13
●​ Jurisdictional Questions Raised by Conflict: Finally, armed conflicts raise complex
jurisdictional questions for ongoing legal actions. Ukraine is not a party to the
Rome Statute but lodged ad hoc declarations in 2014 and 2015 accepting ICC
jurisdiction over alleged crimes committed on its territory. This unprecedented
arrangement has led to debates about the scope of ICC jurisdiction in
non-member states and the tension between state sovereignty and international
accountability. The conflict has also caused disputes over the territorial scope of
investigations in occupied areas, such as Crimea and parts of the Donbas,
complicating ongoing proceedings.

FATE OF INTERNATIONAL TREATIES

The outbreak of armed conflict poses significant challenges for the stability and
continuity of international treaty relations. While international law does not presume that
war automatically terminates or suspends treaties, conflict often creates conditions
where their observance becomes questioned, frustrated, or redefined. The Vienna
Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), particularly Articles 60 and 62, provides
guidance on material breaches and fundamental changes of circumstances, while the
International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Effects of Armed Conflicts on
Treaties (2011) clarify that a state of war does not per se abrogate treaty obligations,
though it may affect their operation depending on the subject matter.

In practice, armed conflicts have generated systems of outcomes for treaty obligations,
ranging from violations and non-compliance to suspension or outright termination of
treaties. Examples can be seen in the Russia–Ukraine war which includes Ukraine’s
2019 termination of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership with Russia.
The civil war in Sudan has obstructed peace agreements and humanitarian
undertakings, while Afghanistan’s Taliban has strained compliance with core human
rights treaties such as CEDAW and the CRC.

In these regards, the following subsections will examine the four principal outcome
treaties may undergo during armed conflicts.

Violations
Armed conflicts frequently produce treaty breaches, especially of the UN Charter (use of
force) and IHL/human-rights treaties. The UN General Assembly, by
emergency-special-session Resolution ES-11/1 (2 March 2022), condemned Russia’s
aggression against Ukraine as contrary to Article 2(4) of the UN Charter.
 14
In Sudan, the ongoing civil war has seen repeated violations of the 2020 Juba Peace
Agreement’s ceasefire/security commitments and of humanitarian obligations, with UN
and research reporting on systematic attacks and obstruction of aid.
In Afghanistan, post-2021 practices (bans on girls’ education, restrictions on women’s
work/movement) conflict with CEDAW and CRC obligations, documented by UN and EU
bodies.

Non-compliance
Even without formal derogation or withdrawal, conflict conditions often cause
widespread non-compliance with ongoing treaty duties. Afghanistan’s continued
restrictions on women and girls have been flagged by UN Women and UN treaty bodies
as inconsistent with Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women (1979), marking de facto non-performance of binding obligations. In
Ukraine–Russia hostilities, environmental and cross-border assessment duties under
UNECE’s Espoo Convention have been weakened by military operations and
emergency governance, hindering implementation pathways provided in compliance
analyses.

Suspension
Conflict, armed or not, can lead to suspension of treaty relations or participation in
conventions. Following Russia’s expulsion from the Council of Europe on 16 March
2022, Russia ceased to be a party to the European Convention on Human Rights
(ECHR) on 16 September 2022. This altered the operation of ECHR obligations
vis-a-vis Russia while numerous related cooperation arrangements were effectively
paused. In Sudan, authorities suspended engagement with IGAD’s mediation in
January 2024 as an example of conflict-driven suspension of regional commitments and
cooperation mechanisms central to implementing peace and humanitarian
undertakings.
Pursuant to this, VCLT provides that suspension may be invoked for material breach in
certain cases (Art. 60), and the ILC Draft Articles on the Effects of Armed Conflicts on
Treaties (2011) outline how armed conflict can affect a treaty’s operation without per se
voiding it.

Termination
Conflict may result in termination of treaties by terms specified by the treaty or VCLT
grounds. Ukraine’s Law No. 2643-VIII (6 Dec 2018) invoked VCLT Art. 60 to terminate
the 1997 Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership with Russia; as notified, the
treaty’s operation ended in 2019.
Separately, Ukraine legislated termination of the Ukraine–Russia BIT in August 2023
(effective 27 Jan 2025), illustrating how wartime unrest can fold up bilateral treaty
 15
frameworks, subject to any recognized clauses. Articles 60 and 62 of the VCLT guides
when wars can lawfully end or alter treaty relations, though, limits were provided for.

LEGAL STATUS OF TREATY SUSPENSION

The suspension of treaties during armed conflict has long been a debated issue in
international law, occupying a complex position between the doctrines of state necessity
and the principle of pacta sunt servanda.

According to the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) 1969, suspension
refers to the temporary cessation of a treaty’s operation without terminating it altogether
(Articles 57–60). Suspension may occur either by agreement of the parties or as a
consequence of a material breach, causing impossibility of performance, or fundamental
change of circumstances.

In the context of armed conflict, the legal status of treaty suspension is shaped by the
International Law Commission’s (ILC) 2011 Draft Articles on the Effects of Armed
Conflicts on Treaties, which clarify that the outbreak of armed conflict does not
automatically terminate or suspend treaties. Instead, the nature of the treaty and its
object and purpose determine whether it can continue to operate. Treaties that are
humanitarian in nature, such as the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional
Protocols, remain fully binding even during war, while others, such as treaties relating to
diplomatic privileges or commercial cooperation, may be suspended either by necessity
or by the conduct of the parties.

In the Nicaragua v. United States (1986) case, the International Court of Justice (ICJ)
emphasized that humanitarian obligations under treaties survive armed conflicts and are
not subject to suspension. Similarly, Oppenheim’s International Law (9th edition,
Jennings & Watts, eds.) underlines that suspension of treaties in wartime is exceptional
and limited to treaties whose operation becomes incompatible with the existence of
hostilities.

Therefore, the legal status of treaty suspension is not absolute but conditional. It
requires careful case-by-case evaluation of the treaty’s subject matter, the intent of the
parties, and the widely recognized principle that certain peremptory norms (jus cogens)
and humanitarian treaties are non-derogable. In practice, while commercial and
diplomatic treaties are often suspended during conflicts, humanitarian treaties remain
immune from suspension, reflecting the enduring values of the international community.
 16
CONCLUSION

Armed conflict has remained one of the most disruptive forces within the international
realm, exerting wide-ranging effects on private rights and international obligations. From
the onset, this study defined and contextualized the meaning of armed conflict, private
rights, and international obligations, drawing on established legal authorities and
conventions to situate these concepts within the framework of international law. It further
highlighted the legal framework most prominently the UN Charter, the Geneva
Conventions and their Protocols, human rights treaties, and the Vienna Convention on
the Law of Treaties, that continues to govern relations in times of war and peace alike.
Within this framework, the consequences of armed conflict were shown to extend far
beyond the battlefield, affecting individuals, disregarding private contracts, frustrating
ongoing judicial and arbitral processes, and destabilizing the fate of international
treaties. The case studies from Ukraine, Sudan, and Afghanistan vividly illustrated how
children, refugees, journalists, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable groups
suffer unreasonably, how business contracts and investment arrangements collapse
under the weight of hostilities and how pending proceedings before courts and tribunals
encounter jurisdictional and enforcement problems. Moreover, the study examined how
treaties themselves face violations, non-compliance, suspension, or total termination,
with recent conflicts revealing how fragile international commitments can become when
confronted with the realities of war.

Finally, the examination of treaty suspension and its legal status emphasized that while
the Vienna Convention permits suspension in narrowly defined circumstances,
humanitarian and non-derogable treaties remain binding even in conflict, reflecting the
enduring core of international law. What emerges is a clear recognition that although
armed conflicts weaken legal norms, they do not erase them. Rather, they test their
potency, demanding greater fidelity to international humanitarian law, stronger
compliance with human rights instruments, and more robust accountability through
international mechanisms such as the ICC and the ICJ. In traversing these issues, this
work has shown that the true challenge lies not in the inadequacy of law but in the
political will of states to uphold it. The fate of private rights and international obligations
during conflict therefore serves as a measure of the international community’s
commitment to justice, order, and the preservation of humanity even in the time of war.
 17
REFERENCES

●​ U. O. Umozurike, Introduction to International Law (Spectrum Books Ltd, Ibadan,

1993, 2nd edition).
●​ Malcolm N. Shaw, International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2021, 9th
edition).
●​ Gerd Oberleitner, Human Rights in Armed Conflict: Law, Practice, Policy
(Cambridge University Press 2015).
●​ Jenny Kuper, International Law Concerning Child Civilians in Armed Conflict
(Clarendon Press 1997).
●​ Tobias Ackermann, The Doctrine of the Effects of Armed Conflicts on Investment
Treaties (Cambridge University Press 2022).
●​ International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), The Role of the Private Sector
in Ensuring Respect for International Humanitarian Law (ICRC 2024).
●​ Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, Rule of
Law in Armed Conflicts (RULAC) Project.
●​ Charter of the United Nations (1945).
●​ Geneva Conventions I–IV (1949).
●​ Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions (1977).
●​ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966).
●​ International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966).
●​ Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948).
●​ Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
(CEDAW, 1979).
●​ European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, 1950).
●​ Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1998).
●​ Statute of the International Court of Justice (1945).
●​ International Law Commission, Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for
Internationally Wrongful Acts, with Commentaries (2001).
●​ International Institute of Humanitarian Law, San Remo Manual on International
Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea (1994).