Rule 156.

Definition of War Crimes war over which the Tribunal has jurisdiction, protected persons or objects or if they breach
the Appeals Chamber stated that the important values.
Rule 156. Serious violations of international expression “laws and customs of war” included
humanitarian law constitute war crimes. all laws and customs of war in addition to (i) The conduct endangers protected persons
those listed in the Article. or objects.
Summary
The adjective “serious” in conjunction with The majority of war crimes involve death,
State practice establishes this rule as a norm “violations” is to be found in the military injury, destruction or unlawful taking of
of customary international law applicable in manuals and legislation of several States. property. However, not all acts necessarily
both international and non-international have to result in actual damage to persons or
armed conflicts. There is also practice which does not contain objects in order to amount to war crimes.
the adjective “serious” with respect to
International and non-international armed violations and which defines war crimes as any This became evident when the Elements of
conflicts violation of the laws or customs of war. The Crimes for the International Criminal Court
military manuals and legislation of a number were being drafted. It was decided, for
The Statute of the International Criminal Court of States similarly do not require violations of example, that it was enough to launch an
defines war crimes as, inter alia, “serious international humanitarian law to be serious in attack on civilians or civilian objects, even if
violations of the laws and customs applicable order to amount to war crimes. However, most something unexpectedly prevented the attack
in international armed conflict” and “serious of this practice illustrates such violations in the from causing death or serious injury. This
violations of the laws and customs applicable form of lists of war crimes, typically referring could be the case of an attack launched
in an armed conflict not of an international to acts such as theft, wanton destruction, against the civilian population or individual
character”. murder and ill-treatment, which indicates that civilians, even though, owing to the failure of
these States in fact limit war crimes to the the weapon system, the intended target was
The Statutes of the International Criminal more serious violations of international not hit. The same is the case for subjecting a
Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for humanitarian law. protected person to medical experiments –
Rwanda and of the Special Court for Sierra actual injury is not required for the act to
Leone and UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 Serious nature of the violation amount to a war crime; it is enough to
for East Timor also provide jurisdiction over endanger the life or health of the person
“serious” violations of international A deductive analysis of the actual list of war through such an act.
humanitarian law. crimes found in various treaties and other
international instruments, as well as in (ii) The conduct breaches important values.
In the Delalić case in 2001, in interpreting national legislation and case-law, shows that
Article 3 of the Statute of the International violations are in practice treated as serious, Acts may amount to war crimes because they
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and therefore as war crimes, if they endanger breach important values, even without
listing the violations of the laws or customs of physically endangering persons or objects
Page | 1
directly. These include, for example, abusing In the interlocutory appeal in the Tadić case in Earlier practice seems to indicate that a
dead bodies; subjecting persons to humiliating 1995, the Appeals Chamber of the specific act did not necessarily have to be
treatment; making persons undertake work International Criminal Tribunal for the former expressly recognized by the international
that directly helps the military operations of Yugoslavia stated that “the violation of the community as a war crime for a court to find
the enemy; violation of the right to fair trial; rule [of international humanitarian law] must that it amounted to a war crime. This point is
and recruiting children under 15 years of age entail, under customary or conventional law, illustrated by many judgments by national
into the armed forces. the individual criminal responsibility of the courts which found the accused guilty of war
person breaching the rule”. crimes committed in the Second World War
The Appeals Chamber of the International which were not listed in the Charters of the
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in This approach has been consistently taken by International Military Tribunals at Nuremberg
the interlocutory appeal in the Tadić case in the International Criminal Tribunals for the and at Tokyo, such as the lack of fair trial,
1995, stated that, in order for an offence to be former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda in their abuse of dead bodies, offending the religious
subject to prosecution before the Tribunal, the case-law concerning serious violations of sensibilities of prisoners of war, and misuse of
“violation must be serious, that is to say, it international humanitarian law other than the red cross emblem.
must constitute a breach of a rule protecting grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.
important values, and the breach must involve National practice after the Second World War
grave consequences for the victim”. For example, with regard to serious violations showed that, whereas States of a common-
of Additional Protocol I other than grave law tradition tended to try persons on the
It then went on to illustrate this analysis by breaches, the International Criminal Tribunal basis of international law, many States with a
indicating that the appropriation of a loaf of for the former Yugoslavia had to examine civil law tradition – in the absence of special
bread belonging to a private individual by a whether such violations entail individual legislation for war crimes – tried the same
combatant in occupied territory would violate criminal responsibility under customary crimes on the basis of their ordinary criminal
Article 46(1) of the Hague Regulations, but international law or whether Additional legislation.
would not amount to a “serious” violation of Protocol I provides for individual criminal
international humanitarian law. As seen from responsibility notwithstanding the fact that For the latter, therefore, if the act was criminal
the examples of war crimes referred to above, the violation is not listed as a grave breach. during peacetime, it could be treated as a war
this does not mean that the breach has to crime when committed during armed conflict,
result in death or physical injury, or even the This practice does not exclude the possibility provided that the act was also prohibited by
risk thereof, although breaches of rules that a State may define under its national law the laws and customs of war. There is also
protecting important values often result in other violations of international humanitarian some recent practice to the same effect.
distress and anxiety for the victims. law as war crimes. The consequences of so
doing, however, remain internal and there is Violations of customary international law or
Violations entailing individual criminal no internationalization of the obligation to treaty law
responsibility under international law repress those crimes and no universal
jurisdiction.
Page | 2
The International Military Tribunal at interlocutory appeal in the Tadić case in 1995, rather indicates the acts that are criminal
Nuremberg determined that violations of the also stated that war crimes can comprise when committed by any person.[29] Several
Hague Regulations amounted to war crimes serious violations of both customary rules and military manuals contain the same approach.
because these treaty rules had crystallized into applicable treaty provisions, i.e., those that are [30] A number of military manuals, as well as
customary law by the time of the Second “unquestionably binding on the parties [to the some legislation, expressly include the term
World War. Similarly, the negotiation of the armed conflict] at the time of the alleged “civilians” among the persons that can commit
Statute of the International Criminal Court was offence”.[26] war crimes.[31]
based on the premise that, to amount to a war Interpretation (iii) Mental element. International case-law has
crime to be included in the Statute, the indicated that war crimes are violations that
conduct had to amount to a violation of a Practice provides further specifications with are committed wilfully, i.e., either
customary rule of international law. Another respect to the nature of the conduct intentionally (dolus directus) or recklessly
example of violations of customary constituting a war crime, its perpetrators and (dolus eventualis).[32] The exact mental
international law being used as a basis for war their mental state. element varies depending on the crime
criminality is the resolution adopted by concerned.[33]
consensus in the UN Commission on Human (i) Acts or omissions. War crimes can consist of List of war crimes
Rights declaring that Israel’s “continuous acts or omissions. Examples of the latter
grave breaches” of the Fourth Geneva include failure to provide a fair trial and failure War crimes include the following serious
Convention and Additional Protocol I were war to provide food or necessary medical care to violations of international humanitarian law:
crimes.[23] As neither Israel nor many of the persons in the power of the adversary. [27]
Commission’s members had ratified Unlike crimes against humanity, which consist (i) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions:
Additional Protocol I at the time, this of a “widespread or systematic” commission of In the case of an international armed conflict,
statement must have been based on the prohibited acts, any serious violation of any of the following acts committed against
understanding that these breaches constituted international humanitarian law constitutes a persons or property protected under the
war crimes under customary international law. war crime. This is clear from extensive and provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:
However, the vast majority of practice does consistent case-law from the First World War • wilful killing;
not limit the concept of war crimes to until the present day. • torture or inhuman treatment, including
violations of customary international law. (ii) Perpetrators. Practice in the form of biological experiments;
Almost all military manuals and criminal codes legislation, military manuals and case-law • wilfully causing great suffering or serious
refer to violations of both customary law and shows that war crimes are violations injury to body or health;
applicable treaty law.[24] Additional practice committed either by members of the armed • extensive destruction or appropriation of
specifying treaty provisions as war crimes forces or by civilians against members of the property, not justified by military necessity
includes statements to this effect by France, armed forces, civilians or protected objects of and carried out unlawfully and wantonly;
Germany and the United States.[25] The the adverse party.[28] National legislation • compelling a prisoner of war or other
Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal typically does not limit the commission of war protected person to serve in the forces of a
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in the crimes to members of the armed forces, but hostile Power;
Page | 3
• wilfully depriving a prisoner of war or other • making improper use of distinctive emblems
protected person of the rights of a fair and indicating protected status, resulting in death There is also practice which extends the scope
regular trial; or serious personal injury; of this war crime to the perfidious use of
• unlawful deportation or transfer; • making improper use of the flag, the military protective signals.
• unlawful confinement; insignia or uniform of the enemy resulting in
• taking of hostages. death or serious personal injury; (ii) Other serious violations of international
Basis for the war crimes listed above • killing or wounding an adversary by resort to humanitarian law committed during an
perfidy; international armed conflict (continued):
This list of grave breaches was included in the • making medical or religious personnel, • making the civilian population or individual
Geneva Conventions largely on the basis of medical units or medical transports the object civilians, not taking a direct part in hostilities,
crimes pursued after the Second World War by of attack; the object of attack;
the International Military Tribunals at • pillage or other taking of property contrary • launching an attack in the knowledge that
Nuremberg and at Tokyo and by national to international humanitarian law; such attack will cause incidental loss of civilian
courts. The list is repeated in the Statutes of • destroying property not required by military life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian
the International Criminal Tribunal for the necessity. objects which would be clearly excessive in
former Yugoslavia and of the International relation to the concrete and direct military
Criminal Court.[34] It is also reflected in the These violations were the subject of war advantage anticipated;
legislation of many States.[35] The crimes trials after the Second World War.[36] • making non-defended localities and
understanding that such violations are war They are also included in the Statute of the demilitarized zones the object of attack;
crimes is uncontroversial. International Criminal Court or, if not • subjecting persons who are in the power of
replicated in exactly the same terms, are in an adverse party to physical mutilation or to
(ii) Other serious violations of international effect covered, as evidenced by the Elements medical or scientific experiments of any kind
humanitarian law committed during an of Crimes for the International Criminal Court. which are neither justified by the medical,
international armed conflict: [37] The war crime “making medical or dental or hospital treatment of the person
• committing outrages upon personal dignity, religious personnel, medical units or medical concerned nor carried out in his or her interest,
in particular, humiliating or degrading transports the object of attack” covers aspects and which cause death to or seriously
treatment and desecration of the dead; of the war crime contained in Article 8(2)(b)(ix) endanger the health of such person or
• enforced sterilization; and (xxiv) of the Statute of the International persons;
• compelling the nationals of the adverse party Criminal Court.[38] The identification of these • the transfer by the occupying power of parts
to take part in military operations against their violations as war crimes in the Statute of the of its own civilian population into the territory
own party; International Criminal Court was not it occupies or the deportation or transfer of all
• killing or wounding a combatant who has controversial. Attacking persons hors de or parts of the population of the occupied
surrendered or is otherwise hors de combat; combat and the perfidious use of protective territory within or outside this territory;
• declaring that no quarter will be given; emblems or signs are listed in Additional • making buildings dedicated to religion,
Protocol I as grave breaches.[39] education, art, science or charitable purposes
Page | 4
or historic monuments the object of attack, civilians or damage to civilian objects which “making civilian objects, that is, objects that
provided they are not military objectives. would be clearly excessive in relation to the are not military objectives, the object of
These violations of customary international concrete and direct military advantage attack” or “making the civilian population or
law are listed as grave breaches in Additional anticipated” follows more closely the wording individual civilians, not taking a direct part in
Protocol I and as war crimes in the Statute of found in the Statute of the International hostilities, the object of attack” contained in
the International Criminal Court.[41] The Criminal Court.[44] The word “overall” is not the Statute.[48]
wording varies slightly between these two contained in Articles 51 and 85 of Additional References to more practice can be found in
instruments, but in essence they are the same Protocol I, nor in the substantive rule of the commentary to Rule 36.
violations as indicated in the Elements of customary international law (see Rule 14). The (iv) subjecting persons who are in the power of
Crimes for the International Criminal Court. purpose of this addition in the Statute of the an adverse party to physical mutilation or to
(i) Making the civilian population or individual International Criminal Court appears to be to medical or scientific experiments of any kind
civilians, not taking a direct part in hostilities, indicate that a particular target can have an which are neither justified by the medical,
the object of attack. In addition to the practice important military advantage that can be felt dental or hospital treatment of the person
mentioned above, there are numerous over a lengthy period of time and affect concerned nor carried out in his or her interest,
examples of national legislation which make it military action in areas other than the vicinity and which cause death to or seriously
a criminal offence to direct attacks against of the target itself. As this meaning is included endanger the health of such person or
civilians, including the legislation of States in the existing wording of Additional Protocol I persons. In addition to the practice referred to
not, or not at the time, party to Additional and the substantive rule of customary above, numerous military manuals specify the
Protocol I.[42] References to more practice international law, the inclusion of the word prohibition of physical mutilation, medical or
can be found in the commentary to Rule 1. “overall” does not add an extra element.[45] scientific experiments or any other medical
(ii) Launching an attack in the knowledge that (iii) making non-defended localities and procedure not indicated by the state of health
such attack will cause incidental loss of civilian demilitarized zones the object of attack. In of the patient and not consistent with
life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian addition to the practice referred to above, it is generally accepted medical standards.[49] The
objects which would be clearly excessive in an offence to attack non-defended localities prohibition is also found extensively in national
relation to the concrete and direct military under the legislation of numerous States.[46] legislation.[50] References to more practice
advantage anticipated. In addition to the References to more practice can be found in can be found in the commentary to Rule 92.
practice mentioned above, numerous States the commentary to Rule 37. (v) the transfer by the occupying power of
have adopted legislation making it an offence While “making demilitarized zones the object parts of its own civilian population into the
to carry out an attack which violates the of attack” is a grave breach of Additional territory it occupies or the deportation or
principle of proportionality.[43] References to Protocol I, it is not mentioned as such in the transfer of all or parts of the population of the
more practice can be found in the commentary Statute of the International Criminal Court. occupied territory within or outside this
to Rule 14. Nevertheless, attacks against demilitarized territory. In addition to the practice referred to
The definition of the war crime “launching an zones are an offence under the legislation of above, numerous military manuals prohibit the
attack in the knowledge that such attack will numerous States.[47] In addition, such attacks deportation or transfer by a party to the
cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to would arguably constitute the war crime of conflict of parts of its civilian population into
Page | 5
the territory it occupies.[51] This rule is the Protection of Cultural Property also they are entitled to the protection given to
included in the legislation of numerous States. subjects such specially protected cultural civilians or civilian objects under international
[52] objects (“placed under enhanced protection”) humanitarian law;
In addition, numerous military manuals specify to the grave breaches regime, as it provides • launching an attack in the knowledge that
the prohibition of unlawful deportation or that the attack on such objects or the use of such attack will cause widespread, long-term
transfer of civilians in occupied territory.[53] It such objects for military purposes is subject to and severe damage to the natural
is an offence under the legislation of many the obligation to prosecute or extradite on the environment which would be clearly excessive
States to carry out such deportations or basis of universal jurisdiction.[60] Although an in relation to the concrete and direct military
transfers.[54] There is case-law relating to the attack on religious or cultural property is a war advantage anticipated;
Second World War supporting the prohibition. crime under customary international law, the • using prohibited weapons;
[55] obligation to prosecute or extradite on the • declaring abolished, suspended or
References to more practice can be found in basis of universal jurisdiction for grave inadmissible in a court of law the rights and
the commentaries to Rules 129–130. breaches defined in this respect in Additional actions of the nationals of the hostile party;
(vi) making buildings dedicated to religion, Protocol I and in the Second Protocol to the • using human shields;
education, art, science or charitable purposes Hague Convention is only binding on the • conscripting or enlisting children under the
or historic monuments the object of attack, parties to those treaties. This is true for all the age of 15 into armed forces, or using them to
provided they are not military objectives. In war crimes listed here and which constitute participate actively in hostilities;
addition to the practice referred to above, it is grave breaches of Additional Protocol I (see • committing sexual violence, in particular
a punishable offence to attack such objects commentary to Rule 157). rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution and
under the legislation of numerous States.[56] References to more practice can be found in enforced pregnancy.
With respect to attacking religious or cultural the commentary to Rule 38. This group of war crimes is listed in the Statute
objects, the Statute of the International (ii) Other serious violations of international of the International Criminal Court.[61] With
Criminal Court uses as the basis for this war humanitarian law committed during an the exception of the war crime of “declaring
crime the fact that such an attack is a violation international armed conflict (continued): abolished, suspended or inadmissible in a
of customary international law, in particular • making civilian objects, that is, objects that court of law the rights and actions of the
because the objects referred to are civilian and are not military objectives, the object of nationals of the hostile party”, these crimes
this prohibition is included in the Hague attack; reflect the development of customary
Regulations.[57] Additional Protocol I provides • using starvation of civilians as a method of international law since the adoption of
that attacks on religious or cultural objects are warfare by depriving them of objects Additional Protocol I in 1977.
grave breaches if such objects have been indispensable to their survival, including by (i) Making civilian objects, that is, objects that
accorded special protection.[58] In practice impeding relief supplies; are not military objectives, the object of
this refers to the special protection regime • making persons or objects involved in a attack. The customary nature of the war crime
created by the Hague Convention for the humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping of making civilian objects the object of attack
Protection of Cultural Property.[59] The mission in accordance with the Charter of the has been recognized in several judgments of
Second Protocol to the Hague Convention for United Nations the object of attack, as long as the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Page | 6
former Yugoslavia.[62] Many States have legislation making starvation of civilians as a criminal if, at the time, the troops had not
adopted legislation making it an offence to method of warfare an offence.[67] References become involved in hostilities and had not
attack civilian objects during armed conflict. to more practice can be found in the thereby lost the protection afforded to
[63] This war crime is in effect a modern commentary to Rules 53–55. civilians under international humanitarian law
formulation based on the rule in the Hague (iii) Making persons or objects involved in a (see Rule 6). The reference to humanitarian
Regulations which prohibits destruction of humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping assistance is intended to refer to such
enemy property unless imperatively mission in accordance with the Charter of the assistance being carried out either in the
demanded by the necessities of war.[64] This United Nations the object of attack, as long as context of peacekeeping operations by troops
would also cover the deliberate destruction of they are entitled to the protection given to or civilians, or in other contexts by civilians.
the natural environment. References to more civilians or civilian objects under international References to more practice can be found in
practice can be found in the commentary to humanitarian law. The prohibition of attacking the commentary to Rules 31 and 33.
Rules 7 and 50. peacekeeping troops has developed with the (iv) Launching an attack in the knowledge that
(ii) Using starvation of civilians as a method of greater use of such forces over the last few such attack will cause widespread, long-term
warfare by depriving them of objects decades. The criminalization of such behaviour and severe damage to the natural
indispensable to their survival, including by was first introduced in the Convention on the environment which would be clearly excessive
impeding relief supplies. The prohibition of Safety of UN and Associated Personnel.[68] in relation to the concrete and direct military
using starvation of civilians as a method of Although this Convention is not yet widely advantage anticipated. The protection of the
warfare was considered a new rule at the time ratified, its characterization of attacks on such natural environment is a value that has
of the adoption of Additional Protocol I. personnel, or objects belonging to them, as considerably developed since the adoption of
However, practice since then has not only war crimes was accepted without difficulty Additional Protocol I. The description of the
made this a customary rule, but its inclusion in during the negotiation of the Statute of the war crime relating to the environment in the
the Statute of the International Criminal Court International Criminal Court. It is an offence Statute of the International Criminal Court,
as a war crime if committed in an international under the legislation of many States to attack combining as it does the high threshold of
armed conflict was not controversial. personnel and objects involved in a damage and lack of proportionality,[71] is
Destroying objects indispensable to the peacekeeping mission.[69] more restrictive than the customary
survival of the civilian population also reflects As shown by the formulation “as long as they prohibitions relating to the environment (see
a customary prohibition. There had, in fact, are entitled to the protection given to civilians Rules 43 and 45). The inclusion of this war
been a prosecution relating to a case of or civilian objects under international crime was not controversial during the
destruction of crops in a scorched earth humanitarian law” in the Statute of the negotiation of the Statute of the International
operation during the Second World War, International Criminal Court,[70] this war Criminal Court. In addition, a deliberate attack
although the basis of the prosecution was the crime is a special application of the war crimes on the environment, not required by military
destruction of property not required by of making the civilian population or individual necessity, would also amount to a war crime
military necessity.[65] The prohibition of civilians the object of attack and making because it would in effect be an attack on a
starvation is set forth in numerous military civilian objects the object of attack. In the case civilian object (see Rule 7).
manuals.[66] Many States have adopted of attack on troops, the act would only be
Page | 7
(v) Using prohibited weapons. States inhuman or cruel treatment,[77] or as an either in the Conventions or in Additional
negotiating the Statute of the International outrage upon personal dignity.[78] Its inclusion Protocol I but would have to be considered a
Criminal Court did so on the basis that the list in the Statute of the International Criminal grave breach on the basis that it amounts to
of war crimes in the Statute reflected Court was uncontroversial.[79] Using human inhuman treatment or wilfully causing great
customary law rules, including the list of shields constitutes a criminal offence under suffering or serious injury to body or health. It
weapons whose use was subject to the Court’s the legislation of many States.[80] References was not the subject of war crimes trials after
jurisdiction. As well as the specific weapons to more practice can be found in the the Second World War, even though the
listed in Article 8(2)(b)(xvii)–(xix) of the commentary to Rule 97. practice of sexual violence was widespread.
Statute, weapons that are of a nature to cause (viii) Conscripting or enlisting children under However, since then, not only has there been
superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering or the age of 15 into armed forces, or using them recognition of the criminal nature of rape or
which are inherently indiscriminate are listed to participate actively in hostilities. The sexual assault in armed conflict in the
in Article 8(2)(b)(xx), which adds that they prohibition of enlisting children under 15 years legislation of many States,[84] but there have
must also be subject to a “comprehensive of age into the armed forces, or using them to also been a number of prosecutions and
prohibition” and listed in an annex to the participate actively in hostilities, was convictions on this basis by the International
Statute.[72] introduced in Additional Protocol I.[81] Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia
Several military manuals provide that the use Although this is a relatively recent prohibition, and for Rwanda.[85]
of prohibited weapons constitutes a war the inclusion of such acts as war crimes in the The inclusion of crimes of sexual violence in
crime.[73] In addition, the use of weapons that Statute of the International Criminal Court was the Statute of the International Criminal Court
are prohibited under international law is a uncontroversial. The recruitment of children is was not of itself controversial. There was,
criminal offence under the legislation of prohibited under the legislation of many however, some controversy concerning two of
numerous States.[74] This practice is both States. [82] Using children to participate the crimes of sexual violence, namely, “forced
widespread and representative. actively in hostilities is also prohibited under pregnancy” and “any other form of sexual
(vi) Declaring abolished, suspended or the legislation of many States.[83] References violence”. “Forced pregnancy” was introduced
inadmissible in a court of law the rights and to more practice can be found in the as a crime in the Statute of the International
actions of the nationals of the hostile party. commentary to Rules 136–137. Criminal Court following the suggestion of
This prohibition goes back to the Hague (ix) Committing sexual violence, in particular Bosnia and Herzegovina and others because of
Regulations.[75] It was included without rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution and the incidence of such acts during its armed
controversy in the Statute of the International enforced pregnancy. The explicit listing in the conflict.[86] Some delegations, however,
Criminal Court, as it was considered part of Statute of the International Criminal Court of feared that this crime might be interpreted as
customary international law.[76] various forms of sexual violence as war crimes imposing on States a duty to provide forcibly
(vii) Using human shields. Using human shields reflects changes in society in recent decades, impregnated women access to abortion.[87]
is prohibited under customary international in particular the demand for greater respect Given that the crime involves two other war
law (see Rule 97) but has also been recognized for and recognition of women. Although rape crimes, namely, rape and unlawful
as a war crime by the International Criminal was prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, it confinement, the customary nature of the
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, either as was not explicitly listed as a grave breach criminality of this behaviour is not in doubt.
Page | 8
Characterizing “any other form of sexual • launching an attack against works or found, for example, in the Priebke case in
violence” as a war crime caused some difficulty installations containing dangerous forces in 1997, which concerned reprisal killings in the
for some delegations as they felt it to be the knowledge that such attack will cause Second World War.[93] References to more
somewhat vague. It was solved by introducing excessive incidental loss of civilian life, injury practice can be found in the commentary to
the words “also constituting a grave breach of to civilians or damage to civilian objects. Rule 103.
the Geneva Conventions”. Although the These war crimes are not referred to as such in (iii) Despoliation of the wounded, sick,
intention of some of the groups that pressed the Statute of the International Criminal shipwrecked or dead. In the Pohl case in 1947,
for the inclusion of this crime was to stress Court. However, they are criminal either by the US Military Tribunal at Nuremberg stated
that any form of sexual violence should be virtue of the fact that such acts in practice that robbing the dead “is and always has been
considered to be a grave breach, this phrase amount to one or more of the crimes listed in a crime”.[94] Such behaviour generally
has been interpreted by States in the Elements the Statute, or because they are violations of amounts to either pillage or to the taking of
of Crimes for the International Criminal Court customary international law, the criminal property in violation of international
as requiring that “the conduct was of a gravity nature of which has been recognized by the humanitarian law. The behaviour is also
comparable to that of a grave breach of the international community. specifically characterized as a criminal act in
Geneva Conventions”.[88] (i) Slavery and deportation to slave labour. the legislation of numerous States.[95]
References to more practice can be found in Slavery and deportation to slave labour are The 1906 Geneva Convention for the
the commentary to Rule 93. violations of customary international law (see Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded
(ii) Other serious violations of international Rules 94–95), and their practice in armed and Sick in Armies in the Field requires that
humanitarian law committed during an conflict amounts to a war crime. The “the necessary measures to repress, in time of
international armed conflict (continued): legislation of many States prohibits slavery war, individual acts of robbery and ill
• slavery and deportation to slave labour; and the slave trade, or “enslavement”.[89] treatment of the sick and wounded of the
• collective punishments; Deportation of civilians to slave labour is listed armies” be taken.[96] In particular, many
• despoliation of the wounded, sick, as a war crime in the Charter of the manuals prohibit pillage of the wounded, sick
shipwrecked or dead; International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. and shipwrecked, sometimes referred to as
• attacking or ill-treating a parlementaire or [90] “Enslavement” and deportation to slave “marauding”, or specify that it constitutes a
bearer of a flag of truce; labour were the basis for several war crimes war crime.[97]
• unjustifiable delay in the repatriation of trials after the Second World War.[91] References to more practice can be found in
prisoners of war or civilians; References to more practice can be found in the commentary to Rules 111 and 113.
• the practice of apartheid or other inhuman or the commentary to Rules 94–95. (iv) Attacking or ill-treating a parlementaire or
degrading practices involving outrages on (ii) Collective punishments. Collective bearer of the flag of truce. This is a violation of
personal dignity based on racial punishments amount to depriving the victims the Hague Regulations and of customary
discrimination; of a fair trial and are listed as a war crime in the international law (see Rule 67). It amounts to
• launching an indiscriminate attack resulting legislation of numerous States.[92] Depending an attack on either a civilian or a combatant
in loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to on the nature of the punishment, it is likely to who at that moment is hors de combat and
civilian objects; amount to one or more other war crimes, as therefore constitutes a war crime. Several
Page | 9
manuals consider that attacks against a degrading treatment. Apartheid in the likely extent of death or injury amounts to an
parlementaire displaying the white flag of application of international humanitarian law indiscriminate attack. Launching such an
truce constitutes a war crime.[98] Breach of is a crime under the legislation of numerous attack knowing that the degree of incidental
the inviolability of parlementaires is an offence States.[103] In addition, respect for all persons civilian deaths, injuries or damage will be
under the legislation of many States.[99] hors de combat without adverse distinction is excessive is categorized as a grave breach in
References to more practice can be found in a fundamental guarantee provided for in Additional Protocol I.[107] References to more
the commentary to Rule 67. customary international law (see Rule 88). practice can be found in the commentary to
(v) Unjustifiable delay in the repatriation of (vii) Launching an indiscriminate attack Rule 11.
prisoners of war and civilians. This war crime is resulting in loss of life or injury to civilians or (viii) Launching an attack against works or
listed as a grave breach in Additional Protocol damage to civilian objects. The prohibition of installations containing dangerous forces in
I.[100] So far, no prosecutions of this war indiscriminate attacks is part of customary the knowledge that such attack will cause
crime have been noted, nor is this crime international law (see Rule 11). Launching an excessive incidental loss of civilian life, injury
specifically listed in the Statute of the indiscriminate attack constitutes an offence to civilians or damage to civilian objects. This
International Criminal Court. However, the under the legislation of numerous States.[104] war crime is listed as a grave breach in
criminal nature of this violation has been Although not listed as such in the Statute of Additional Protocol I.[108] It covers attacks
accepted by the 161 States party to Additional the International Criminal Court, an against works or installations which are
Protocol I. The legislation of numerous States indiscriminate attack amounts in practice to an themselves military objectives, or attacks
specifies that it is a war crime, including attack on civilians, as indicated by the against military objectives located at or in the
Azerbaijan, which is not party to Additional International Court of Justice in the Nuclear vicinity of such works, resulting in excessive
Protocol I.[101] In case a delay in the Weapons case in 1996 and in several incidental civilian casualties or damage.[109]
repatriation of prisoners of war or civilians is judgments of the International Criminal Such an attack is a violation of customary
unjustifiable, in practice there would no longer Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.[105] international law and is also covered, in
exist a legal basis for their deprivation of The description of “intention” of the Statute of practice, by the Statute of the International
liberty and it would amount to unlawful the International Criminal Court includes the Criminal Court (“launching an attack in the
confinement (see commentary to Rule 99). perpetrator being “aware that [the knowledge that such attack will cause
(vi) The practice of apartheid or other inhuman consequence] will occur in the ordinary course incidental loss of life or injury to civilians or
or degrading practices involving outrages on of events”.[106] It is clear that launching an damage to civilian objects … which would be
personal dignity based on racial attack knowing that civilian casualties are clearly excessive in relation to the concrete
discrimination. This war crime is listed as a likely to occur does not in itself necessarily and direct overall military advantage
grave breach in Additional Protocol I.[102] It amount to an indiscriminate attack, because anticipated”).[110] References to more
does not appear in exactly these terms in the incidental injury or damage is not as such practice can be found in the commentary to
list of war crimes in the Statute of the prohibited. However, launching an attack Rule 42.
International Criminal Court, but such conduct without attempting to aim properly at a (iii) Serious violations of common Article 3 of
would amount to a war crime as an outrage on military target or in such a manner as to hit the Geneva Conventions:
personal dignity, as well as humiliating and civilians without any thought or care as to the
Page | 10
In the case of an armed conflict not of an there is no difference in practice as far as the against civilians is an offence under the
international character, any of the following elements of these crimes is concerned. This is legislation of numerous States.[115]
acts committed against persons taking no borne out by the Elements of Crimes for the References to more practice can be found in
active part in the hostilities, including International Criminal Court and by the case- the commentary to Rule 1.
members of armed forces who have laid down law of the International Criminal Tribunal for (ii) Pillage. With respect to the war crime of
their arms and those placed hors de combat by the former Yugoslavia.[112] pillage, the International Criminal Tribunal for
sickness, wounds, detention or any other (iv) Other serious violations of international the former Yugoslavia, in the Jelisić case in
cause: humanitarian law committed during a non- 1999, convicted the accused of “plunder”, a
• violence to life and person, in particular international armed conflict: term sometimes used instead of “pillage”,
murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel • making the civilian population or individual under Article 3 of its Statute.[116] Pillage is an
treatment and torture; civilians, not taking a direct part in hostilities, offence under the legislation of many States.
• committing outrages upon personal dignity, the object of attack; [117] References to more practice can be found
in particular humiliating and degrading • pillage; in the commentary to Rule 52.
treatment; • committing sexual violence, in particular, (iii) Committing sexual violence, in particular,
• taking of hostages; rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution,
• the passing of sentences and the carrying out enforced sterilization and enforced pregnancy. enforced sterilization and enforced pregnancy.
of executions without previous judgment These violations of customary international With respect to sexual violence, the Statute of
pronounced by a regularly constituted court, law are included in the list of war crimes in the the International Criminal Court specifies in
affording all judicial guarantees which are Statute of the International Criminal Court particular rape, sexual slavery, enforced
generally recognized as indispensable. and, for the most part, in the Statutes of the prostitution, enforced sterilization and
Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda enforced pregnancy.[118] The Statutes of the
has crystallized into customary international and of the Special Court for Sierra Leone (see International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
law, and the breach of one or more of its infra). and of the Special Court for Sierra Leone
provisions has been recognized as amounting (i) Making the civilian population or individual define this war crime as “outrages upon
to a war crime in the Statutes of the civilians, not taking a direct part in hostilities, personal dignity, in particular humiliating and
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, of the object of attack. The International Criminal degrading treatment, rape, enforced
the Special Court for Sierra Leone and of the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has prostitution and any form of indecent assault”.
International Criminal Court, as well as by the referred to this prohibition as a war crime in [119] In the Furundžija case in 1998 and
International Criminal Tribunal for the former non-international armed conflicts.[113] The Kunarac case in 2001, the International
Yugoslavia.[111] Its inclusion in the Statute of war crime is not listed in the same terms in the Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
the International Criminal Court was largely Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal convicted the accused of rape in the context of
uncontroversial. It should be pointed out that, for Rwanda, but the Statute refers in general a non-international armed conflict.[120]
although some of the wording is not the same terms to serious violations of Additional Sexual violence is an offence under the
as the equivalent crimes in the grave breaches Protocol II, Article 13 of which prohibits legislation of numerous States.[121] The
applicable to international armed conflicts, attacks against civilians.[114] To direct attacks comments above in relation to the crime of
Page | 11
sexual violence in international armed conflicts international law (see Rule 129). Such acts are (iii) Declaring that no quarter will be given.
also apply. References to more practice can be often, in practice, linked to policies of “ethnic This war crime is listed in the Statute of the
found in the commentary to Rule 93. cleansing” or similarly abusive treatment of International Criminal Court.[129] It is not
(iv) Other serious violations of international certain groups. Such displacement is listed as a referred to in these terms in Additional
humanitarian law committed during a non- war crime under the Statute of the Protocol II but is in practice the same as the
international armed conflict (continued): International Criminal Court.[123] It is also a prohibition of ordering that there be no
• ordering the displacement of the civilian criminal offence under the legislation of survivors in Article 4(1) as well as in Article 4(2)
population for reasons related to the conflict numerous States.[124] There have been many (h), which prohibits threats to kill persons hors
and not required for the security of the condemnations of such behaviour by the UN de combat. The actual carrying out of such
civilians involved or imperative military Security Council, UN General Assembly and threats would be a violation of common Article
necessity; UN Commission on Human Rights in the non- 3 of the Geneva Conventions. It is an offence
• subjecting persons in the power of the international armed conflicts in Afghanistan, under the legislation of numerous States to
adversary to medical or scientific experiments Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burundi, Iraq, order that no quarter be given.[130]
of any kind not necessary for the health of the Liberia, Rwanda, Sudan and Zaire.[125] The order that no quarter be given is a war
persons concerned and seriously endangering References to more practice can be found in crime whether or not the order is carried out.
their health; the commentary to Rule 129. References to more practice can be found in
• declaring that no quarter will be given; (ii) Subjecting persons in the power of the the commentary to Rule 46.
• making medical or religious personnel or adversary to medical or scientific experiments (iv) Making medical or religious personnel or
objects the object of attack; of any kind not necessary for the health of the objects the object of attack. Such persons and
• conscripting or enlisting children under the persons concerned and seriously endangering objects are protected under Additional
age of 15 into the armed forces or groups, or their health. This act is a violation of Protocol II.[131] Attacks on them are listed as a
using them to participate actively in hostilities; Additional Protocol II,[126] and of customary war crime under the Statute of the
• making religious or cultural objects the international law (see Rule 92). It is listed in International Criminal Court in slightly
object of attack, provided that they are not the Statute of the International Criminal Court different terms, namely “directing attacks
military objectives. as a war crime if such experimentation results against buildings, material, medical units and
These are violations of Additional Protocol II in death or seriously endangers the health of transport, and personnel using the distinctive
and of customary international law, and have the persons concerned.[127] It is also emblems of the Geneva Conventions in
been listed as war crimes in the Statute of the considered criminal under the legislation of conformity with international law”.[132]
International Criminal Court. numerous States.[128] Such behaviour is a Despite this wording, it should be noted that
(i) Ordering the displacement of the civilian violation of the respect due to persons in the the distinctive emblem does not of itself
population for reasons related to the conflict power of the adversary and is likely also to confer protected status, and therefore the
and not required for the security of the amount to cruel treatment or an outrage upon crime is actually attacking persons or objects
civilians involved or imperative military personal dignity (see Rule 90). References to knowing that they are medical personnel, units
necessity. This act is a violation of Additional more practice can be found in the commentary and transports and religious personnel,
Protocol II,[122] and of customary to Rule 92.
Page | 12
irrespective of whether or not they are using Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. This practice constitutes an offence under the
the emblem.[133] [139] Recruiting children under the age of 15 legislation of numerous States.[149] The crime
Religious personnel, whether military or years into the armed forces or groups or using is also listed in the Statute of the International
civilian, are entitled to the same respect as them to participate actively in hostilities was Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.
military or civilian medical personnel. Attacks first prohibited by treaty in non-international [150] In the Tadić case in 1995, the
on such persons are recognized as criminal in armed conflicts in Additional Protocol II.[140] International Criminal Tribunal for the former
the legislation of many States.[134] Since then, the unlawfulness of this behaviour Yugoslavia found that it applied to non-
The UN Commissions of Experts Established has gained universal recognition and is international armed conflicts.[151] References
pursuant to Security Council Resolutions 780 reaffirmed in the Convention on the Rights of to more practice can be found in the
(1992) and 935 (1994) investigated violations the Child, to which virtually all States are commentary to Rule 38.
of international humanitarian law in the party.[141] The use of children under 15 in (iv) Other serious violations of international
conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda various non-international armed conflicts has humanitarian law committed during a non-
respectively, on the understanding that these been repeatedly and vigorously condemned by international armed conflict (continued):
violations amounted to war crimes.[135] the international community. [142] This war • making civilian objects the object of attack;
Similarly, attacks on hospitals, medical units crime is also set forth in the legislation of • seizing property of the adverse party not
and transports are criminalized by the many States.[143] required by military necessity;
legislation of many States.[136] References to more practice can be found in • making persons or objects involved in a
Attacks on protected persons or objects in the commentary to Rules 136–137. humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping
Rwanda, Somalia and the former Yugoslavia (vi) Making religious or cultural objects the mission in accordance with the Charter of the
have been condemned by the UN Security object of attack, provided that they are not United Nations the object of attack, as long as
Council and UN Commission on Human military objectives. This practice is prohibited they are entitled to the protection given to
Rights.[137] The protection of medical aircraft by Additional Protocol II,[144] and by civilians or civilian objects under international
is subject to more specific conditions than customary international law (see Rule 38). It is humanitarian law;
other objects (see commentary to Rule 29). listed as a war crime, using wording taken • killing or wounding an adversary by resort to
References to more practice can be found in from the Hague Regulations, in the Statute of perfidy.
the commentary to Rules 25–30. the International Criminal Court.[145] The These are violations of customary
(v) Conscripting or enlisting children under the attack of such objects in non-international international law, listed as war crimes in the
age of 15 into the armed forces or groups, or armed conflicts is criminalized in the Hague Statute of the International Criminal Court.
using them to participate actively in hostilities. Convention for the Protection of Cultural [152]
This practice is listed as a war crime in the Property,[146] to which the Second Protocol (i) Making civilian objects the object of attack.
Statute of the International Criminal Court. adds more detail.[147] The particular This is not the expression used by the Statute
[138] The inclusion of this war crime was not importance attributed to this prohibition by of the International Criminal Court, but it is
controversial during the negotiation of the the international community is evidenced by essentially the same as the war crime of
Statute of the International Criminal Court. the condemnation of such attacks in “destroying the property of an adversary
The crime has also been included in the Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia.[148] unless such destruction … be imperatively
Page | 13
demanded by the necessities of the conflict”. References to more practice can be found in Yugoslavia in the Tadić case in 1995.[165]
[153] The prohibition of attacking civilian the commentary to Rule 50. References to more practice can be found in
objects is contained in many military manuals (iii) Making persons or objects involved in a the commentary to Rule 65.
applicable in non-international armed humanitarian assistance or peacekeeping (iv) Other serious violations of international
conflicts.[154] Numerous States have adopted mission in accordance with the Charter of the humanitarian law committed during a non-
legislation making it an offence to attack United Nations the object of attack, as long as international armed conflict (continued):
civilian objects during armed conflict.[155] they are entitled to the protection given to • using prohibited weapons;
The criminal nature of the violation, indicated civilians or civilian objects under international • launching an indiscriminate attack resulting
in the Statute of the International Criminal humanitarian law. This war crime is contained in death or injury to civilians, or an attack in
Court and the legislation referred to above, is in Article 4 of the Statutes of the Special Court the knowledge that it will cause excessive
based on the importance the international for Sierra Leone and of the International incidental civilian loss, injury or damage;
community attaches to the need to respect Criminal Court.[161] It was included on the • making non-defended localities and
civilian objects. The International Criminal basis that such acts amount to attacks on demilitarized zones the object of attack;
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in the civilians or civilian objects. It is an offence • using human shields;
Blaškić case in 2000, found the accused guilty under the legislation of many States to attack • slavery;
of “unlawful attack[s] on civilian objects” in personnel and objects involved in a • collective punishments;
violation of Article 3 of the Tribunal’s Statute. peacekeeping mission.[162] It is also • using starvation of civilians as a method of
[156] significant that such operations take place in warfare by depriving them of objects
References to more practice can be found in all types of conflicts and the nature of the indispensable to their survival, including by
the commentary to Rule 7. conflict does not change in any way the impeding relief supplies.
(ii) Seizing property of the adverse party not respect that the international community These violations are not listed in the Statute of
required by military necessity. In addition to expects to be accorded to such personnel and the International Criminal Court as war crimes.
pillage, seizing property not justified by their equipment. References to more practice However, State practice recognizes their
military necessity is listed as a war crime in the can be found in the commentary to Rules 31 serious nature and, as a result, a court would
Statute of the International Criminal Court. and 33. have sufficient basis to conclude that such acts
[157] The Statute of the International Criminal (iv) Killing or wounding an adversary by resort in a non-international armed conflict are war
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia lists to perfidy. This war crime is listed in the crimes.
“plunder of public or private property” as a war Statute of the International Criminal Court. (i) Using prohibited weapons. Recent treaties
crime.[158] In the Jelisić case, the International [163] It is an offence under the legislation of prohibiting the use of certain weapons in any
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia many States, especially if it involves the type of conflict require that such use be
convicted the accused of plunder under Article perfidious use of the red cross or red crescent subject to criminal sanctions. This is the case
3(e) of its Statute.[159] Seizing property not emblem.[164] The criminal nature of this act in for the Chemical Weapons Convention,
justified by military necessity is an offence non-international armed conflicts was also Amended Protocol II to the Convention on
under the legislation of many States.[160] confirmed by the Appeals Chamber of the Certain Conventional Weapons and the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Ottawa Convention banning anti-personnel
Page | 14
landmines.[166] The Statute of the to more practice can be found in the indicating disproportionate and indiscriminate
International Criminal Court does not include commentaries to Rules 70–79 and Rule 86. use of Russian military force” in the conflict in
the use of prohibited weapons in the sections (ii) Launching an indiscriminate attack Chechnya based on Additional Protocol II,
dealing with non-international armed resulting in death or injury to civilians, or an which prohibits attacks on civilians but does
conflicts, but this issue was not openly attack in the knowledge that it will cause not specifically refer to indiscriminate or
debated during the Rome Diplomatic excessive incidental civilian loss, injury or disproportionate attacks.[173]
Conference. damage. Launching indiscriminate attacks in References to more practice can be found in
Several military manuals provide that the use non-international armed conflicts has been so the commentary to Rules 11 and 14.
of prohibited weapons constitutes a war frequently and vigorously condemned by the (iii) Making non-defended localities and
crime.[167] The national legislation international community as to indicate the demilitarized zones the object of attack. This
criminalizing the use of prohibited weapons customary nature of this prohibition, which practice amounts to a war crime because such
does so in general terms. None limits such protects important values and is aimed at attacks are either attacks on the civilian
criminality to international armed conflicts and preventing unwarranted death and injury. As population or on civilian objects, namely
several explicitly criminalize the use of such, this violation falls into the general destruction of an adversary’s property not
prohibited weapons in non-international definition of war crimes. Launching an imperatively demanded by the necessities of
armed conflicts.[168] As most States define a indiscriminate attack is an offence under the the conflict (see Rule 50).[174] This crime
“war crime” as being a “violation” or a “serious legislation of numerous States.[170] The constitutes an offence under the legislation of
violation” of international humanitarian law International Criminal Tribunal for the former numerous States. [175] References to more
(see supra), it is reasonable to conclude that Yugoslavia referred to this violation in the practice can be found in the commentary to
they would consider the use of prohibited context of non-international armed conflicts in Rules 36–37.
weapons in non-international armed conflicts the Tadić case in 1995 and, in general terms, in (iv) Using human shields. This practice has
to fall within this category. the Kupreškić case in 2000.[171] been recognized as a war crime by the
The UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin on The same consideration is true for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
observance by United Nations forces of launching of attacks in the knowledge that Yugoslavia, either as a form of cruel
international humanitarian law, which is not they will cause excessive incidental civilian treatment,[176] or an outrage upon personal
limited to international armed conflicts, damage, injury or death. In particular, dignity.[177] The legislation of several States
provides that violations of its rules – including launching such attacks is an offence under the criminalizes the use of human shields in non-
those requiring respect for treaties prohibiting legislation of many States.[172] international armed conflicts.[178] The use of
the use of certain weapons – be treated as Both indiscriminate and disproportionate human shields in non-international armed
criminal offences.[169] attacks can be likened to attacks on civilians if conflicts has been condemned by States and
The use of prohibited weapons may also the perpetrator was aware that this would be by the United Nations, for example, with
amount to another war crime, in particular the effect of the attack in the ordinary course respect to the conflicts in Liberia, Rwanda,
attacking civilians or launching indiscriminate of events. This was in effect confirmed by the Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tajikistan and the
attacks. This would be the case, for example, UN Commission on Human Rights when it former Yugoslavia.[179] References to more
for the use of biological weapons. References expressed its grave concern about “reports
Page | 15
practice can be found in the commentary to expressing outrage at such acts in non- composite war crimes are, in particular,
Rule 97. international armed conflicts, including the enforced disappearances and ethnic cleansing.
(v) Slavery. Slavery is prohibited by Additional impediment of relief supplies which caused Enforced disappearance amounts in practice
Protocol II,[180] and customary international the starvation of civilians. This practice proves to depriving a person of a fair trial and often
law (see Rule 94). The military manuals and that such behaviour is not only a violation of also to murder (see commentary to Rule 98).
the legislation of many States prohibit slavery customary international law, but also, in the Ethnic cleansing comprises various war crimes,
and the slave trade, or “enslavement”.[181] In eyes of the international community, a very such as murder, rape, unlawful deportation or
addition, this practice constitutes a war crime serious violation. ordering the displacement of the civilian
because it amounts to cruel treatment or an The UN Commission on Human Rights population for reasons relating to the conflict
outrage upon personal dignity (see Rule 90). characterized the deliberate impeding of and not required for the security of the
Slavery and slave labour are also prohibited humanitarian relief supplies to Sudanese civilians nor for reasons of imperative military
under the legislation of numerous States.[182] civilians as “an offence to human dignity”.[187] necessity, and outrages on personal dignity
References to more practice can be found in It is particularly noteworthy that the UN based on racial discrimination and inhuman or
the commentary to Rule 94. Commission of Experts Established pursuant degrading treatment (see commentary to Rule
(vi) Collective punishments. Collective to Security Council Resolution 935 (1994) 129).
punishments are prohibited by Additional included a breach of Article 14 of Additional
Protocol II,[183] and customary international Protocol II in its interim report on violations of
law (see Rule 103). This prohibition is also set international humanitarian law in Rwanda.
forth in the legislation of many States.[184] [188]
This war crime is listed in the Statutes of the Several States specifically criminalize the use
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda of starvation of civilians as a method of
and of the Special Court for Sierra Leone.[185] warfare.[189] In addition, these violations in
In addition, collective punishments constitute practice amount to killing civilians, in itself a
a war crime because they consist of the war crime, because each violation consists of
deprivation of the right to fair trial (see Rule deliberate acts that in the normal course of
100) and may also constitute cruel treatment events lead to their death. They may also be
(see Rule 90). References to more practice can considered to be inhuman treatment (see Rule
be found in the commentary to Rule 103. 87).
(vii) Using starvation of civilians as a method of References to more practice can be found in
warfare by depriving them of objects the commentary to Rules 53–55.
indispensable to their survival, including by Composite war crimes
impeding relief supplies. This practice is a It should also be noted that certain conduct,
violation of Additional Protocol II,[186] and not listed above, is nevertheless criminal
customary international law (see Rule 53). In because it consists of a combination of a
addition, there is very extensive State practice number of war crimes. These so-called
Page | 16