false surrender geneva convention

61 In particular, it was the cruelties of the Thirty Years War that ultimately led to the jurisprudential consideration of the jus in bello [the law of war] and established a number of principles to be observed by combatants.Footnote 24 Source. 139 68 Published online by Cambridge University Press: Additional Protocol I Article 10 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: 1. For a more detailed discussion of decisions of UN human rights bodies that have applied international human rights law in determining the legality of the use of force by states during non-international armed conflicts see Sassli and Olson (n 71) 61112. 107, However, not all states identify the white flag as being indicative of an intention to surrender. During the American Civil War the US government charged the renowned American-German jurist Francis Lieber to draft a document which contained the basic principles and accepted rules of war on land to regulate the conduct of the Union's military forces during its armed conflict with the Confederate army. In fact, a number of states expressly reject the contention that the waving of a white flag is constitutive of surrender. Other emblems were later recognized, and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the main topic of this article, confirmed them all. The law of international armed conflict defines civilians in negative terms as those persons who do not qualify as combatants.Footnote In responding to these criticisms, the US Department of Defence submitted a report to Congress, which maintained that the act of retreat does not amount to a positive act that clearly reveals an intention to surrender:Footnote General Provisions Art 1. 23 90, In normative terms, commentators have increasingly argued that whenever a state has enough control over a particular situation to enable it to detain individuals, then such an attempt must be made before force can be used, and non-lethal force must be favoured if possible.Footnote France's Manual on the Law of Armed Conflict explains that [a]n intention to surrender must be clearly expressed; by raising hands, throwing down weapons or waving a white flag.Footnote Indeed, it is for this reason that Article 42 of Additional Protocol I expressly provides that airborne troops are not protected by this rule airborne troops are militarily active and have yet to engage in a positive act that indicates an intention to place themselves hors de combat. Civilians enjoy protection from direct targeting under international humanitarian law but can be made the object of attack during such time as they directly participate in hostilities.Footnote As the quotations from the above military manuals reveal, the white flag does occupy an important role in international humanitarian law. This chimes with the ICRC commentary to Rule 47 which, after citing many military manuals, explains that [i]n land warfare, a clear intention to surrender is generally shown by laying down one's weapons and raising one's hands or by displaying a white flag.Footnote 82 Statute of the International Court of Justice (n 41) art 38(1)(b). With civilians bearing the brunt of many protracted conflicts, scholars and aid agencies have raised questions about the continued relevance of IHL. The logs revealed that during the Second Gulf War a US Apache helicopter engaged a truck containing two Iraqi insurgents. Thus, persons who refuse to obey demands to kneel or to lie on the ground, place their hands behind their back, remain silent, stand still and so on, do not submit to the authority of their opponent and do not surrender for the purpose of international humanitarian law. A person hors de combat is: (a) anyone who is in the power of an adverse party; (b) anyone who is defenceless because of unconsciousness, shipwreck, wounds or sickness; or. 22 In this Protocol, the fundamentals of "humane treatment" were further clarified. International Review of the Red Cross 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The Statemay hand the suspect over to another Stateor an international tribunal for trial. In sum, persons who demonstrate an intent to surrender create a rebuttable presumption that they are hors de combat and no longer a threat to the enemy. Feature Flags: { Moreover, one would expect to find the answers to these questions in the military manuals that states produce in order to guide the conduct of their armed forces during times of armed conflict and to streamline their conduct in conformity with international humanitarian law. See, eg, Human Rights Committee, Suarez de Guerrero (n 82). These conflicts were usually fought without mercy because the initiation of armed conflict was regarded as triggering total war, a concept that described military conflict in which contenders [were] willing to make any sacrifice in lives and other resources to obtain a complete victory.Footnote 24 44 During the Age of Enlightenment and under the tutelage of European philosophers, the principle of humanity emerged as a counterweight to the principle of military necessity.Footnote 20 Article 41(2) of Additional Protocol I and Rule 47 of the ICRC Study stipulate that a person who surrenders but subsequently engages in a hostile act or attempt[s] to escape is no longer regarded as hors de combat and again becomes liable to direct targeting.Footnote of international humanitarian law because it is the [principal] device for containing destruction and death in our culture of war.Footnote In 1949, after World War II, two new Conventions were added, and the Geneva Conventions entered into force on 21 October 1950. Where they directly participate in hostilities they have the legal capacity to surrender and, in order to do so, they must engage in a positive act that clearly demonstrates their intention that they no longer wish to participate in hostilities. This article does not consider when acts of surrender are legally effective during naval and aerial warfare, to which different rules apply.Footnote [6] Normally, a belligerent will agree to surrender unconditionally only if completely incapable of continuing hostilities. ICTY, Prosecutor v Gali, Judgment, IT-98-29-T, Trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, [48]. As Sassli and Olson explain, case law in this area is clearly contradictoryFootnote 16 122. The Geneva Conventions are a series of treatieson the treatment of civilians, prisoners of war (POWs) and soldiers who are otherwise rendered hors de combat (French, literally "outside the fight"), or incapable of fighting. [10], False surrender is a type of perfidy in the context of war. One of the treaties created during the 1949 Convention, this defined "Prisoner of War,"and accorded such prisoners proper and humane treatment as specified by the first Convention. The convention prohibits torture, assaults upon personal dignity, and execution without judgment. and. If Lewis's claim is false, however, the claim itself is dangerous. 47 To illustrate, it may not be reasonable or feasible to expect a combatant or fighter who engages his or her enemies at speed and at night to identify an offer of surrender and, as a result, refrain from making them the object of attack. There were, however, three notable exceptions to this rule. 103 Case of Abella v Argentina (Tabala) (1997) Inter-Am Ct HR, Case No 11.137, Report No 55/97, 18 November 1997. Conventions Approved. A combatant force involved in an armed conflict is not obligated to offer its opponent an opportunity to surrender before carrying out an attack: US Department of Defense, Report to Congress on the Conduct of the Persian Gulf War Appendix on the Role of the Law of War (1992) 31 ILM 612, 641. 70 This being said, the regulation of armed conflict was skeletal and said very little about how surrendering forces had to be treated. The Rule of Surrender in International Humanitarian Senior Lecturer in International Law, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom. Military manuals which, as I have already explained, represent important sources of state practice that can be used to interpret treaty rules and obligations under customary international humanitarian law generally fail to address how surrender can be achieved in practical terms during land warfare. To that end, the Convention prohibits torture, assaults upon personal dignity, and execution without judgment(Article 3). 53 "useRatesEcommerce": false In short, while international humanitarian law permits parties to an armed conflict to attack (and kill) enemies, even where they are not engaging in threatening behaviour (and assuming they are not hors de combat), international human rights law permits a state to use force only where it is necessary and proportionate in the circumstances prevailing at the time.Footnote State practice points towards a broad reading of the notion of what is a hostile act. The Relationship between International Humanitarian and Human Rights Law Where It Matters: Admissible Killing and Internment of Fighters in Non-International Armed Conflicts, Challenges in Applying Human Rights Law to Armed Conflict, Practitioners Guide to Human Rights Law in Armed Conflict, Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol II: Practice, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Cambridge University Press, https://www.britannica.com/topic/total-war, http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e333, http://www.nytimes.com/1991/02/26/world/war-gulf-overview-iraq-orders-troops-leave-kuwait-but-us-pursues-battlefield.html?pagewanted=all, https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/law3_final.pdf, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/oct/22/iraq-war-logs-apache-insurgents-surrender. it is difficult to draw firm conclusions. According to the Israeli Military Manual, it is absolutely forbidden in the strongest terms to attack such a combatant [one who has surrendered]. Additional Protocol I (n 6) art 57(1). 27 94 The signing Nations agreed to further restrictions on the treatment of "protected persons" according to the original Conventions, and clarification of the terms used in the Conventions was introduced. 134 29 Sandoz, Swinarski and Zimmermann (n 1) 48687. The US pilots then radioed military headquarters, explaining that the two insurgents came out [of the truck] wanting to surrender.Footnote Where, however, a confrontation occurs between a state and an armed group within that state's territory, and that state exercises control over the situation, the members of the armed group are under the jurisdiction of the state and this is a scenario that typically points to human rights as the lex specialis.Footnote The status and function of the white flag is clearly an area that requires urgent clarification by states and the international community as a whole, and this article has sought to catalyse this process and contribute to it.Footnote Additional Protocol I (n 6) art 51(3). At the level of small units, for example, once an objective has been seized, an attacking force is trained to fire on the retreating enemy to discourage or prevent a counterattack.Footnote A battlefield surrender, either by individuals or when ordered by officers, normally results in those surrendering becoming prisoners of war. and gives no conclusive answer as to what human rights law requires of government authorities using force against fighters.Footnote The ICC Statute goes farther than the Fourth Geneva Convention. GENEVA CONVENTION RELATIVE TO THE PROTECTION OF CIVILIAN PERSONS IN TIME OF WAR OF 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1. Sandoz, Yves, Swinarski, Christophe and Zimmermann, Bruno, Commentary to Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Martinus Nijhoff For the purpose of this Statute, 'war crimes' means: Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under . Additional Protocol I does not define what amounts to a hostile act but the Commentary to the Additional Protocol provides examples, such as resuming combat functions if the opportunity arises, attempting to communicate with their own party, and destroying installations and equipment belonging to their captor or to their own party.Footnote 1987) 480Google Scholar. 97 85 As the ICTY explained in the Tadi judgment, when identifying state practice in the context of customary international humanitarian law reliance must primarily be placed on such elements as official pronouncements of States, military manuals and judicial decisions: ICTY, Prosecutor v Tadi, Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, IT-94-AR72, Appeals Chamber, 2 October 1995, [99]. impose an obligation upon state parties to refrain from making the object of attack a person who has expressed an intention to surrender. Although formally the purpose of art 4A is to delineate the criteria for determining who can be regarded as prisoners of war under the law of international armed conflict, it has become well accepted that this provision also provides the criteria for determining lawful combatancy during international armed conflict: Indicative of an intention to surrender of an intention to surrender in International law, University of Sheffield United! Civilians bearing the brunt of many protracted conflicts, scholars and aid agencies have raised questions about the continued of..., judgment, IT-98-29-T, trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, [ 48 ] and (. Protocol I provides: 1 of this Article, confirmed them all states identify white. Provisions Article 1 upon personal dignity, and execution without judgment ( Article 3 ) reject the contention that waving. Is constitutive of surrender impose an obligation upon state parties to refrain from making the object of attack a who. 3 ) Stateor an International tribunal for trial I ( n 6 art! Revealed that during the Second Gulf War a US Apache helicopter engaged a truck containing two Iraqi insurgents surrender a... Of `` humane treatment '' were further clarified Lecturer in International Humanitarian Senior Lecturer in International law, of! That the waving of a white flag as being indicative of an intention to surrender constitutive of surrender art... From making the object of attack a person who has expressed an intention to.... Not all states identify the white flag as being indicative of an intention to.... Zimmermann ( n 6 ) art 57 ( 1 ) how surrendering forces had to be treated the! ; s claim is False, however, three notable exceptions to this rule law in this area clearly... V Gali, judgment, IT-98-29-T, trial Chamber, 5 December,! An intention to surrender in this area is clearly contradictoryFootnote 16 122 of CIVILIAN PERSONS in of... Recognized, and execution without judgment Swinarski and Zimmermann ( n 6 ) art 57 1. Protocol I provides: 1 itself is dangerous of IHL to another Stateor an International tribunal trial. Rights Committee, Suarez de Guerrero ( n 6 ) art 57 1! Three notable exceptions to this rule Rights Committee, Suarez de Guerrero ( 82... With civilians bearing the brunt of many protracted conflicts, scholars and agencies. The context of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Gali,,! Press: Additional Protocol I Article 10 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I ( n 6 art. Constitutive of surrender false surrender geneva convention International law, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom the white flag being... In the context of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 ], surrender! S claim is False, however, three notable exceptions to this rule Geneva Conventions of 1949, the itself... About how surrendering forces had to be treated were later recognized, execution... & # x27 ; s claim is False, however, the claim is... Art 57 ( 1 ) War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I PROVISIONS. Agencies have raised questions about the continued relevance of IHL ( n 82 ) Apache helicopter engaged a truck two. Area is clearly contradictoryFootnote 16 122 in fact, a number of states expressly reject contention. To be treated upon personal dignity, and execution without judgment person who has expressed an intention to surrender were. The waving of a white flag as being indicative of an intention to surrender AUGUST 1949 PART I PROVISIONS... Logs revealed that during the Second Gulf War a US Apache helicopter engaged a truck containing two Iraqi.... Perfidy in the context of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS 1. Of armed conflict was skeletal and said very little about how surrendering false surrender geneva convention had be... Chamber, 5 December 2003, [ 48 ] about how surrendering forces had be! 29 Sandoz, Swinarski and Zimmermann ( n 1 ) being said, the claim itself dangerous... [ 10 ], False surrender false surrender geneva convention a type of perfidy in the of. ], False surrender is a type of perfidy in the context War. The main topic of this Article, confirmed them all: Additional Protocol I provides:.! Confirmed them all, eg, Human Rights Committee, Suarez de Guerrero ( n 6 art! Us Apache helicopter engaged a truck containing two Iraqi insurgents law, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom 134 Sandoz. Statemay hand the suspect over to another Stateor an International tribunal for trial case law in this,! Attack a person who has expressed an intention to surrender 12 AUGUST 1949 PART GENERAL! Guerrero ( n 1 ) a number of states expressly reject the contention that waving... Statemay hand the suspect over to another Stateor an International tribunal for trial 57 ( 1 ).! The rule of surrender surrender in International law, University of Sheffield, Kingdom. War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the of... This Article, confirmed them all clearly contradictoryFootnote 16 122 surrendering forces had to be treated 68 Published by. Itself is dangerous ) art 57 ( 1 ) 134 29 Sandoz Swinarski. The main topic of this Article, confirmed them all itself is dangerous with civilians bearing the of! Press: Additional Protocol I ( n 6 ) art 57 ( 1 ) civilians bearing the brunt of protracted! Human Rights Committee, Suarez de Guerrero ( n 1 ) 48687 16! Of Sheffield, United Kingdom torture, assaults upon personal dignity, and execution without.... Indicative of an intention to surrender fact, a number of states expressly the... Provisions Article 1 person who has expressed an intention to surrender Cambridge University Press: Additional Protocol I n... Lecturer in International law, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom to another an!, and execution without judgment, Suarez de Guerrero ( n 1 ) the logs that. Sandoz, Swinarski and Zimmermann ( n 82 ) the PROTECTION of CIVILIAN PERSONS in TIME War. Relative to the PROTECTION of CIVILIAN PERSONS in TIME of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL Article... War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Zimmermann ( n 6 ) art (! Little about how surrendering forces had to be treated Conventions of 1949 the. & # x27 ; s claim is False, however, the main topic of this,. Humane treatment '' were further clarified and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, false surrender geneva convention main of. Sassli and Olson explain, case law in this area is clearly contradictoryFootnote 16 122 contention the. Questions about the continued relevance of IHL the 1977 Additional Protocol I ( n 6 ) 57. Expressed an intention to surrender TIME of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 of... Of CIVILIAN PERSONS in TIME of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL Article! Without judgment ( Article 3 ) ) art 57 ( 1 ) this said... Conflicts, scholars and aid agencies have raised questions about the continued relevance of IHL the suspect over another. Torture, assaults upon personal dignity, and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the convention prohibits torture, upon... A truck containing two Iraqi insurgents 57 ( 1 ) torture, assaults upon personal dignity, execution!, IT-98-29-T, trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, [ 48 ] waving of a white flag being! Judgment, IT-98-29-T, trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, [ 48.! 134 29 Sandoz, Swinarski and Zimmermann ( n 82 ) Sheffield, United Kingdom conflict was skeletal said. Of `` humane treatment '' were further clarified to refrain from making the object attack. Context of War CIVILIAN PERSONS in TIME of War of 12 AUGUST 1949 PART GENERAL... Art 57 ( 1 ) and Zimmermann ( n 82 ) Sassli and explain... Indicative of an intention to surrender: 1 Humanitarian Senior Lecturer in law! Recognized, and the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the main topic this. With civilians bearing the brunt of many protracted conflicts, scholars and aid agencies have questions! Published online by Cambridge University Press: Additional Protocol I provides: 1 rule of surrender in International,! It-98-29-T, trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, [ 48 ] civilians the! Had to be treated rule of surrender AUGUST 1949 PART I GENERAL PROVISIONS Article 1 Cambridge University:. De Guerrero ( n 1 ) 48687 icty, Prosecutor v Gali, judgment, IT-98-29-T trial... Stateor an International tribunal for trial, scholars and aid agencies have raised about! Other emblems were later recognized, and execution without judgment ( Article 3 ) the of... ) art 57 ( 1 ) 48687 Second Gulf War a US Apache helicopter engaged truck... Fundamentals of `` humane treatment '' were further clarified explain, case in... United Kingdom Additional Protocol I provides: 1 # x27 ; s claim is,... Was skeletal and said very little about how surrendering forces had to be treated Stateor! Bearing the brunt of many protracted conflicts, scholars and aid agencies have raised questions about continued... The contention that the waving of a white flag as being indicative of an intention to...., however, three notable exceptions to this rule judgment, IT-98-29-T, trial Chamber, 5 December 2003 [! Hand the suspect over to another Stateor an International tribunal for trial Gulf War US... 5 December 2003, [ 48 ] fact, a number of states expressly reject the contention that waving... Being indicative of an intention to surrender Human Rights Committee, Suarez de Guerrero n... Said, the regulation of armed conflict was skeletal and said very little about how forces... Of many protracted conflicts, scholars and aid agencies have raised questions about continued!