MILITARY NECESSITY, MILITARY OCCUPATION AND THE USE OF FORCE IN INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW: AN EXTRAPOLATIVE APPRAISAL

Abstract

Military Necessity, basically, borders on International Humanitarian Law, and it entails the principle that a belligerent may apply only the quantity and/or amount and kind of force necessary to defeat an enemy. It demands that a party to an armed conflict may resort only to the means and methods that are necessary to achieve the legitimate goals of the armed conflict. Military necessity is only limited by the principle of humanity. A territory, on the other hand, is considered as occupied the moment it is placed under the power and authority of the hostile army or belligerent. Under International Humanitarian Law, there are rules that govern not just military necessity and military occupation, but also the use and\ or application of force during armed conflict. This Article explored the principles of military necessity, military occupation, use of force and the rules governing their application in the prosecution of war. The study adopted a doctrinal research methodology for interrogating the existing legal structures available for these principles, their uses and the abuse thereof. The paper also looked at the cases of authorized use of force by the United Nations’ Security Council. Findings from the study revealed both positive and negative strides. The paper ended with recommendations centered around strict compliance to the rules amongst other things.