Biological Weapon and Warfare- (Article)


Introduction

Biological Weapon Convention was the first multilateral disbarment treaty which prohibits the production, development and stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin weapons and on their destruction[1]. Biological Weapon Convention (BWC) also referred to as Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention. This treaty was signed on 10th April, 1972 and came into effect on 26th March, 1975. A new instrument that would supplement the 1925 Geneva Protocol was established in the Convention after the result of prolonged efforts by the international community. However The Geneva Protocol prohibits the use but not possession or development of chemical and biological weapons[2]. In order to maintain the peace as the Convention was under the procedure for further development.

As ahead of schedule as the First BWC Conference Meeting in 1980, a few states communicated dissatisfaction at the nonappearance of measures to check the arrangements of the show and fabricate trust in consistency, something intensified by claims of toxin-weapons use in South East Asia. The finish of the Cold War gave a chance to considerably change this deficiency, and during the 1990s state parties looked to investigate specialized parts of BW check through crafted by a group of confirmation specialists, a procedure that got known as "VEREX". This was followed in the mid-1990s by political dealings to build up a convention, which included arrangement for a check system for the BWC in what got known as the Specially appointed Gathering. The development of the show has likewise been smothered by proceeded with disappointment over universal collaboration under Article X. Numerous Impartial and Uncommitted (NAM) states from the Worldwide South have communicated disappointment over what they see as the helpless usage of the special part of this article and the contradiction of commitments under Article X with presence of the Western-drove Australia Gathering send out control system. Numerous Western states, interestingly, have highlighted the broad universal participation and innovation move that has been and is being attempted, though to a great extent outside the show. In addition, they likely view the Australia Gathering as a significant and compelling instrument for forestalling the expansion of double utilize natural hardware and materials. At long last, the advancement of the BWC has been impacted by more extensive logical turns of events and movements in the worldwide security talk. Bioterrorism was not a significant worry during the 1970s. Be that as it may, throughout the advancement of the show, the 'deskilling' and 'democratization' of parts of science has empowered a more extensive scope of entertainers to take part in science, something obvious in the development of DIY Bio development. Joined with the developing remarkable quality of fear mongering (especially following the September the eleventh assaults and the ensuing Bacillus anthracis letter assaults in the US in 2001) this has made bioterrorism a progressively critical arrangement issue. This has brought about developing worldwide consideration regarding the local usage of the BWC since 2001

As it can be observed, Biological weapon or chemical weapons were widely used in the aftermath of the First World War. So a protocol was introduced in Geneva in order to ban the use of such weapons. However, the ban only prohibited the use of chemical and biological weapon but their production and possession was not completely banned. So it took time to impose total ban on the biological weapon and it was finally achieved in the year 1972 through the Biological Weapon Convention.

What is Biological Weapon?

-          Biological weapon refers to the microorganism like bacteria, virus, fungi etc. which are intentionally release to kill or cause disease in human, animals and other living organism. The release of such weapons is illegal in nature and it can disturb the international peace and security. The use of chemical and biological weapon was banned by the international committee after the World War I and the ban was reinforced in 1972 and 1993 by prohibiting the production, development, a stockpiling and transfer of these weapons[3].

Shortcomings

If we see the present scenario where the whole world is under the COVID-19 pandemic and it is still vague whether it is what we call biological weapon or it can termed as natural disaster called upon by mother earth.

The Biological Weapon Convention helped a lot to achieve the international peace but it has failed to deal with certain shortcoming such as-

·         Only the states which have signed under this Biological Convention weapon has the rights to consult or lodge a complaint with the United Nation Security Council (UNSC) with the hope of securing the peace among the nations. It can also appeal to the International Court of Justice but all the states are not legally bound by the Biological Weapon Convention (BMC).

·         Biological Weapon Convention do not have a proper standing body or adjudicatory body to settle the matter as well as the implementation of the guideline and rule under the Biological Weapon Convention (BMC).

·         It also lacks the capabilities of verification and inspection.

·         There are 14 countries which have not ratified the Biological Weapon Convention (BMC) including the states in regions of major tension.[4]

So in other words, the present convent still needs adequate modification and changes as it still lacks the capacity to handle biological weapon crisis as we all are experiencing in this current scenario.

Relevance of the Biological Weapon Convention

The reason why the convention can be useful is to bring uniformity and to uplift the public health in order to provide security and protection. The rapid spread of the corona virus, the outbreak of Ebola, the Spanish Flu can be an accidental release of the biological toxin and it can also be natural occurrence in terms of respiratory disease. The Biological Weapon Convention is the only treaty which is applicable to whole class of weapon. We can also say that it is applicable in case of natural outbreak of various diseases as well as intentional biological attacks.    

In the present scenario, there are certain assumptions regarding the outbreak of COVID-19 that it is a deliberate biological attack but it is just an assumption without any evidence. If we consider this assumption then we can see that the relevance of Biological Weapon Convention can act as a measure to maintain international peace, public health and security.

Right and Obligation

All the States parties have the same rights and obligation under the Biological Weapon Convention (BMC). Unlike the structures that has formed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) which divides the States parties into categories. But the rights and the obligation were first mentioned within the 25 articles of the Convention.

Article I contain the basic prohibition which bans State parties to have any possession and production of biological weapon. The drafting member of the Convention realised that this prohibition was vague and problematic, as these item also have a number of legitimate peaceful purposes. Therefore Article contains the provision that States parties have the right to maintain items that can be justified for ‘prophylactic, protective, or other peaceful purpose.’ & the other 24 articles of the Convention support the rights and obligations contained in Article I in various ways.[5]

Conclusion

It can be concluded that the Biological Weapons Convention (BMC) was enacted to prohibit the illegal use of biological attack and to maintain the international peace and security. The misuse of modern scientific methods and logic is one of the reasons behind the enactment of the Biological Weapon Convention. However it still has some flaws due to which it cannot fully ensure the implementation of BMC and this treaty need modification and new guidelines to handle the situation more swiftly.

 -Anadi Chitranshi

Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

DIGITAL HEALTHCARE IN CORONA TIMES- (Blog)

Image
In these back-breaking times of unprecedented medical crisis, where it has become impossible to reach out to all the people in need of healthcare facilities, the strenuous efforts of the government are focused on the digital healthcare facilities to attenuate the effect of this pandemic. Amidst this chaos, one of the concerns of the government is regarding the suspected cases which can be broadly divided into two groups. Firstly, those people who have the concerned prodromes but the blood test reports are on hold. Secondly, the ones that came in contact with the positive patients but they have not been tested positive yet and are strictly advised to isolate. These people are required to visit the doctor daily until the final diagnosis report is out. This makes even the doctors more exposed to the virus as on average, 22% of the healthcare workers get infected by the virus. In several such cases, this complication has been deciphered with the introduction of virtual health care progra...
Read more

DONOGHUE V. STEVENSON, (1932) AC 562- (Case Commentary)

Image
Introduction In English Law this is a famous case of Scottish dispute which shaped the doctrine of negligence. Facts On 26 August 1928, May Donoghue and one of her friend were sitting in a café in Scotland’s Glasgow. Donoghue’s friend ordered a drink for her. She purchased a bottle of ginger beer which was in a dark opaque glass bottle and later discovered that the bottle contained a decomposing snail. This snail couldn’t be detected until she consumed a greater part of contents of the bottle. She fell ill and was diagnosed with gastroenteritis by a physician. The foundation of her case is that the defendant manufactured ginger beer with an intention for consumption. It was the duty of the respondent to take care that there was no noxious element in the goods and to provide a system of inspection of the bottles before the ginger beer was filled into them but they neglected such duties and are consequently liable for any damage caused by such neglect. Donoghue took a legal act...
Read more

LEGAL SAFEGUARDS FOR WORKING WOMEN AND CHILDREN- (Article)

Image
  INTRODUCTION Role of women is substantially changed as compared to the primitive times where women were supposed to serve their family and indulge primarily in domestic tasks, presently according to the statistics around 150 million population of women is employed in organised as well as unorganised sector. The numbers are continuously multiplying by every passing day but the factor of concern is women are easily prone to exploitation with respect to their rights of employment for ex. Right of get paid, right against harassment, maternity rights, right against excessive workload etc. The reasons are quite a few such as lack of awareness, dominant position of master/employer, lack of support and recognition by the family and other people but major reasons are lack of adjudicating body to the reach of everyone and stringent check mechanism which levy substantial penalties and punishments in case of any violation and misuse of position. Lately for a long period time we are wit...
Read more