Coloniality in International Humanitarian Law: decolonial critique and proposal for emancipatory reinterpretation

Abstract

This article analyzes the colonial continuities within International Humanitarian Law (IHL), revealing how its application remains selective and marked by a Eurocentric bias. It begins from the hypothesis that, although IHL is normatively grounded in universal principles, its operationalization functions as a geopolitical instrument of power, reproducing inequalities between the center and the periphery of the international system. The central objective is to challenge the supposed neutrality of IHL in light of decolonial theories and the epistemologies of the Global South, proposing an emancipatory reinterpretation of the humanitarian legal field. A qualitative methodology is adopted, based on a critical bibliographic review of authors such as Anghie, Crutchley, Getabicha, Pahuja, Quijano, Sander, and Veličković. The findings indicate the persistence of a logic of selectivity in the application of humanitarian norms, particularly in conflicts located in the Global South—especially those of insurgent, communal, or counter-hegemonic nature. The study concludes that overcoming this normative coloniality requires opening IHL to juridical pluriversality and the self-determination of peoples, repositioning justice as the foundational value of international normativity.