Guidelines for Assessing International Compensation for Damage from Armed Conflicts in Iraq

Abstract

This research addresses the controls for assessing international compensation for damages arising from armed conflicts in Iraq, in light of the rules of public international law, international humanitarian law, and international human rights law, as well as relevant Iraqi legislation. The importance of the topic stems from the wide range of damages caused by armed conflicts in Iraq, and the diversity of their forms, including death, injury, displacement, loss of property and income, and destruction of public and private facilities, in addition to psychological, social, and collective damages that are difficult to assess by traditional means This research aims to determine the legal basis for liability for these damages, clarify the conditions for entitlement to compensation, and analyze the criteria adopted in assessing material and moral damages, both individual and collective. It also evaluates the role of international and national mechanisms in redressing damages. The research employs an analytical approach to examine international texts and rules, Iraqi legislation, and relevant resolutions, and a comparative approach to benefit from some international experiences, particularly the experience of the United Nations Compensation Commission.The research concludes that compensation is not based solely on the occurrence of damage during armed conflict, but rather requires proof of the existence of a compelling international obligation, its breach, the possibility of attributing the act to a responsible party, and the existence of a causal link between the act and the damage. It also shows that compensation should not be limited to financial payment, but may include restitution, satisfaction, rehabilitation, and collective reparation. The research recommends establishing an independent national body for redressing damages from armed conflicts, standardizing assessment criteria, developing methods of proof, and creating a central database to prevent double compensation, while ensuring the speed of procedures and the effectiveness of appeals and enforcement.