Our authors

Our Books
More than 500 authors
from all continents.

Historical Origins of International Criminal Law
Historical Origins of
International Criminal Law

Our Books
Philosophical Foundations of
International Criminal Law

Policy Brief Series

Our Books
Concise policy briefs on policy challenges in international law.

Our Books
Research on quality
control in fact-work.

Our Chinese and Indian authors

Our Books
TOAEP has published dozens of Chinese and Indian authors.

Our Books
Art and the ‘politics
of reconciliation’.

Twitter

Element:

3. The perpetrator used the distinctive emblems of the Geneva Conventions.

P.1. Evidence that the perpetrator used an ambulance displaying the Red Cross emblem.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

Trial of Heinz Hagendorf, UNWCC Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, vol. XIII, pp. 146- 148:

"The accused […] was tried […] being charged with having "wrongfully used the Red Cross emblem in a combat zone by firing a weapon at American soldiers from an enemy ambulance displaying such emblem.

[…]

As previously stressed, misuse of the Red Cross emblem is a specific violation of the terms of The Hague and Geneva Conventions. It is hard to conceive of a more flagrant misuse than the firing of a weapon from an ambulance by personnel who were themselves protected by such emblems and by the Conventions, in the absence of an attack upon them. This constituted unlawful belligerency, and a criminal course of action."

P.2. Evidence that the perpetrator used a protected building as a depot.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.3. Evidence that the perpetrator used a protected building as a military office.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.4. Evidence that the perpetrator used a protected building as an observation post.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.5. Evidence that the perpetrator fired from a building displaying the Red Cross emblem.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.6. Evidence that the perpetrator used a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.7. Evidence that the perpetrator displayed the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.8. Evidence that the perpetrator displayed the emblem on a vehicle containing non-medical stores.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

M. Cottier, "Article 8" in Otto Triffterer, ed., Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (1999), margin number 80:

The US Army Field Manual’s list of examples of "improper uses" of Geneva Convention symbols include using a hospital or another building accorded such protection as an observation post or military office or depot, firing from a building or tent displaying the emblem of the Red Cross, using a hospital aircraft to facilitate the escape of combatants, or displaying the emblem on a vehicle containing ammunition or other non-medical stores.101

"101. US Department of the Army, Field Manual- The Law of Land Warfare, FM 27-10 (1956), No. 55"

P.9. Evidence that a warship was camouflaged as a hospital ship entitled to display the emblems of the Geneva Conventions.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

Judgment in the case of Commander Karl Neuman (Hospital Ship "Dover Castle"), Supreme Court at Leipzig, rendered June 4, 1921, (1922) 16 AJIL 704, at pp. 706-707:

"During the first years of the war the German Admiralty respected the military hospital ships of their opponents in accordance with the regulations of the 10th Hague Convention referred to above. Later, however, they came to believe that enemy governments were utilising their hospital ships not only to aid wounded, sick and shipwrecked people, but also for military purposes and that they were thereby violating this convention.

"[…] The memoranda of the German Government about the misuse of enemy hospital ships were known to the accused. The facts set out in them he held to be conclusive, especially as he had received, as he has explained, similar reports from his comrades."

Judgment in the case of Lieutenants Dithmar and Boldt (Hospital Ship "Llandovery Castle"), Supreme Court at Leipzig, rendered July 16, 1921, (1922) 16 AJIL 708, at p.710:

"Patzig [...] was aware that by torpedoing the Llandovery Castle, he was acting against orders. But he was of the opinion, founded on various information […] that on the enemy side, hospital ships were being used for transporting troops and combatants, as well as munitions. He therefore, presumed that, contrary to international law, a similar use was being made of the Llandovery Castle. In particular, he seems to have expected […] that she had American airmen on board.

Knut Dörmann, Elements of War Crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2003), p. 206:

With regard to naval warfare, the German military manual states that:

It is prohibited to misuse the emblem of the Red Cross or to give a ship, in any other way, the appearance of a hospital ship for the purpose of camouflage. It is also prohibited to make improper use of other distinctive signs equal in status with that of the Red Cross (Art. 45 GC II; Art. 37 AP I)…30"

"30. Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, no. 1019."

P.10. Evidence that a warship was camouflaged as a coastal rescue craft entitled to display the emblems of the Geneva Conventions.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

Knut Dörmann, Elements of War Crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2003), p. 206:

With regard to the law of naval warfare, the following rule described in the San Remo Manual reflects customary international law in this field:

Warships and auxiliary vessels, however are prohibited…at all times from actively simulating the status of:

(a) hospital ships, small coastal rescue craft or medical transports;

(b) vessels on humanitarian missions;…

(f) vessels entitled to be identified by the emblem of the red cross or red crescent.28

"28. San Remo Manual, no. 110, pp. 184 ff."

P.11. Evidence that a warship was camouflaged as a vessel on humanitarian missions entitled to display the emblems of the Geneva Conventions.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

Knut Dörmann, Elements of War Crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2003), p. 206:

With regard to the law of naval warfare, the following rule described in the San Remo Manual reflects customary international law in this field:

Warships and auxiliary vessels, however are prohibited…at all times from actively simulating the status of:

(c) hospital ships, small coastal rescue craft or medical transports;

(d) vessels on humanitarian missions;…

(f) vessels entitled to be identified by the emblem of the red cross or red crescent.28

"28. San Remo Manual, no. 110, pp. 184 ff."

P.12. Evidence that a warship was camouflaged as a vessel entitled to be identified by the emblem of the red cross or red crescent.

A. Legal source/authority and evidence:

Knut Dörmann, Elements of War Crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2003), p. 206:

With regard to the law of naval warfare, the following rule described in the San Remo Manual reflects customary international law in this field:

Warships and auxiliary vessels, however are prohibited…at all times from actively simulating the status of:

(e) hospital ships, small coastal rescue craft or medical transports;

(f) vessels on humanitarian missions;…

(f) vessels entitled to be identified by the emblem of the red cross or red crescent.28

"28. San Remo Manual, no. 110, pp. 184 ff."

Lexsitus

Lexsitus logo

CILRAP Film

CMN Knowledge Hub

CMN Knowledge Hub
Online services to help
your work and research.

CILRAP Conversations

Our Books
CILRAP Conversations
on World Order

M.C. Bassiouni Justice Award

M.C. Bassiouni Justice Award

CILRAP Podcast

CILRAP Podcast