² Article I: “The contracting Powers shall issue instructions to their armed land forces which shall be in conformity with the Regulations respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, annexed to the present Convention”.

³ Malraux, A., Les Voix du Silence, Paris, N.R.F., Galerie de la Pléiade, 1951, p. 639.Google Scholar

⁴ Caillois, R., L'homme et le sacré, Paris, Gallimard, 1950, p. 229.Google Scholar

⁵ See the laws of Manu in India (1,200 BC or 200 BC — 200 AD?), the thought of Se Ma in China (400 AD), the precepts of Christianity and Islam, African customs etc. in Letourneau, Ch., la guerre dans les diverses races humaines, Paris, 1895 Google Scholar; Coursier, H., Etudes sur la formation du droit humanitaire, Geneva, I.C.R.C., 1952 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Redslob, R., Histoire des grands principes du droit des gens, Paris, 1923 Google Scholar; Diallo, Y., Traditions africaines et droit humanitaire, Geneva, I.C.R.C., 1976 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bello, E., African Customary Humanitarian Law, Geneva, ICRC, Oyez, 1980 Google Scholar; Achour, Yadh ben, Islam et droit international humanitaire, Geneva, ICRC, 1980.Google Scholar

⁶ See Knebel, F. and IIBailey, W. Ch., Hiroshima, bombe A, Paris, A. Fayard, 1964, pp. 356 Google Scholar; From Nuremberg to My Lai, ed. by Baird, J. W., Lexington, Toronto, London, D.C. Heath and Cy., 1972, pp. 221–225 Google Scholar; Vidal-Naquet, P., La Torture dans la République, Paris, Maspero, 1975 Google Scholar; Vittori, J.-P., Confession d'un professionnel de la torture, Paris, Ramsay, 1980 Google Scholar; Lane, M., Les soldats américains accusent, Paris, Mapero, 1972 Google Scholar; Domination el torture, Paris, Justice et Paix, 1978 Google Scholar; Arendt, H., Eichmann à Jérusalem, Paris, Gallimard, 1966 Google Scholar; Milgram, S., Soumission à l'autorité, Paris, Calmann-Levy, 1980.Google Scholar

⁷ See Additional Protocol I, Art. 36: In the study, development, acquisition or adoption of a new weapon, means or method of warfare, a High Contracting Party is under an obligation to determine whether its employment would, in some or all circumstances, be prohibited by this Protocol or by any other rule of international law applicable to the High Contracting Party. See also La science et la guerre, Dossier from the Groupe de Recherche et d'Information sur la Paix (G.R.I.P.), Nos. 97–99, Bruxelles, 1986.Google Scholar

⁸ Cuny, M., Albert Einstein, Paris, Seghers, 1961, pp. 133 ff.Google Scholar

⁹ Article 12 of the First and Second Geneva Conventions of 1949: Wounded and sicks persons “shall be treated humanely and cared for by the Party to the conflict in whose power they may be, without any adverse distinction founded on sex, race, nationality, religion, political opinions, or any other similar criteria… Only urgent medical reasons will authorize priority in the order of treatment to be administered”.

Additional Protocol I, Article 10:

“1. All the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, to whichever Party they belong, shall be respected and protected.

2. There shall be no distinction among them founded on any grounds other than medical ones”.

(See similar provisions in Additional Protocol II, Article 7.)

¹⁰ Cf. Ingber, L., Droit naturel, P.U.B., 1982, pp. 189 ff.Google Scholar

¹¹ Cf. Redslob, R. op. cit., pp. 90 ff.Google Scholar

¹² See Belgian Court of Cassation, 4 July 1949, Pasicrisis 1949, 1, 517; Grevy, R., “La répression des crimes de guerre en droit belge”, Revue de droit pénal et criminel (R.D.P. et Cr.), 1947–1948, pp. 806 Google Scholar ff., especially paras. 5 et 16.

¹³ See Additional Protocol I, Article 43 [2]:

“Members of the armed forces of a Party to a conflict… are combatants, that is to say, they have the right to participate directly in hostilities.”

Article 44, para. 1:

“Any combatant… who falls into the power of an adverse Party shall be a prisoner of war.”

See also Article 15 (2) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights which prohibits, even in wartime, any infringement of the right to life “except in respect of deaths resulting from lawful acts of war”.

¹⁴ See our study “L'état de nécessité et l'excuse de l'ordre supérieur”, Revue belge de droit international (R.B.D.I.), 1978–1979/1, pp. 65 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See Mertens, P., L'imprescriptibilité des crimes de guerre et contre l'humanité, 1974 Google Scholar; see the UN Convention of 26 November 1968 and the Convention of the Council of Europe of 25 January 1974: contrary to the principle of the nonretroactive nature of penal laws, the first provides that statutory limitations, where they exist, shall not apply (Article IV), while the second lays down only a statuory limitation ex nunc (Art. 2).

¹⁶ For recent examples, see Barbie Affair, French Court of Cassation, 6 October 1983, 26 January 1984 and 20 December 1985, Clunet, 1983, pp. 780 Google Scholar (ff.) note Edelman; ibid., 1984, pp. 308 ff. note Edelman; ibid. 1985, pp. 127 ff., note Edelman; P.N.M.v.Public Prosecutor, Netherlands Supreme Court, 13 01 1981 Google Scholar, Netherlands Yearbook of International Law (N.Y.I.L), 1982, pp. 401 ss.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See, Meyer, M.A., “Liability of prisoners of war for offences committed prior to capture: The Astiz Affair”, International and Comparation Law Quarterly (I.C.L.Q.), 1983, pp. 948 ff.Google Scholar; Filartiga case, U.S. District Crt., N.Y., 01. 10, 1984 Google Scholar, American Journal of International Law (A.J.I.L.), 1984, pp. 677–678 Google Scholar; Siderman Case, U.S. District Crt., CD. Cal. 03 7, 1985 Google Scholar, A.J.I.L., 1985, pp. 1065–1067.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Lauterpacht, H., Oppenheim's International Law, London, 1958, 7th ed., pp. 201–623 (pp. 624–885 for the law of neutrality).Google Scholar

¹⁹ Guggenheim, P., Traité de droit international public, Geneva, 1954, pp. 295–492 (pp. 493–562 for the law of neutrality).Google Scholar

²⁰ A Manual of International Law, London, Stevens, pp. 190–216 (pp. 216–236 for the law of neutrality).Google Scholar

²¹ Völkerrecht, Berlin, Springer-Verlag, 1964, pp. 1360–1437 (for the law of neutrality, pp. 1438–1455).Google Scholar

²² Instituciones de Derecho Internacional Publico, Madrid, Tecnos, 1982, vol. 1 pp. 575–626.Google Scholar

²³ Thierry, Combacau, Sur & Vallee, Droit international public, Paris, Montchrestien, 1975, pp. 597–625 Google Scholar; Nguyen Quoc Dinh, Daillier & Pellet, Droit international public, Paris, L.G.D.J., 1980, pp. 855–872 Google Scholar; Sorensen, M., Manual of Public International Law, London, Macmillan, 1968, pp. 799–839) pp. 840–844 for the law of neutrality).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁴ Quadri, R., Diritto Internazionale Publico, Palermo, Priulla, 1963, pp. 238–276 (pp. 277–288 for the law of neutrality).Google Scholar

²⁵ Reuter, P., Droit international public, Paris, P.U.F., Themis, 1973, pp. 357–390 (pp. 390–408 for the law of neutrality).Google Scholar

²⁶ O'Connell, D.P., International Law, London, Stevens, 1970, II, 958–960 Google Scholar; Brownlie, I., Principles of Public International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1973, pp. 297–298, 307, 544–547.Google Scholar

²⁷ Salmon, J., Droit des gens, Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles, 1982–1983, pp. 337–338, 359.Google Scholar

²⁸ International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg, Judgment of 1 October, 1946, Off. Doc. T. 1, p. 267.

²⁹ Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, Art. 18.

³⁰ Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949: First Convention, Art. 57/Second Convention Art. 56/Third Convention, Art. 137/Fourth Convention, Art. 152; Additional Protocols of 10 June 1977: Protocol I, Art. 93/Protocol II, Art. 21.

³¹ Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949: First Convention, Art. 60/Second Convention, Art. 59/Third Convention, Art. 139/Fourth Convention, Art. 155; Additional Protocols of 10 June 1977: Protocol I, Art. 94/Protocol II, Art. 22.

³² Art. 60 (5): The rules relating to the right to suspend or terminate the operation of a treaty as a consequence of its breach “do not apply to provisions relating to the protection of the human person contained in treaties of a humanitarian character, in particular to provisions prohibiting any form of reprisals against persons protected by such treaties”.

³³ Cf. Rousseau, Ch., Droit international public, Paris, Sirey, 1971, T. 1, pp. 436 Google Scholar ff., see also the references quoted in the Texaco affair, arbitration judgment of 19 01 1977 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Journal de droit international (J.D.I.), 1977, p. 376 Google Scholar, para. 83.

³⁴ Namibia, International Court of Justice (I.C.J.), opinion of 21 06 1977 Google Scholar, Rec. 1977, p. 50 Google Scholar, para. 105; Texaco affair, loc. cit., paras 83 ff.

³⁵ A/Res. 3452 (30) of 9 December 1975, Art. 11: “Where it is proved that an act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been committed by or at the instigation of a public official, the victim shall be afforded redress and compensation in accordance with national law”.

³⁶ Alien Tort Claims Act — Title of United States Code 28, para. 1350 (1982)Google Scholar—empowers district federal courts to hear civil suits brought by aliens for damages resulting from acts “committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the U.S.”.

³⁷ U.S. District Court. Eastern District, New York, Jan. 10, 1984, American Journal of International Law (A.J.I.L.), 1984, ppp. 677–678.Google Scholar

³⁸ In its Resolution 3 (I), the General Assembly: “recommends that Members of the United Nations forthwith take all the necessary measures to cause the arrest of those war criminals who have been responsible for or have taken a consenting part in the above crimes, and to cause them to be sent back to the countries in which their abominable deeds were done, in order that they may be judged and punished according to the laws of those countries”.

³⁹ French Court of Cassation, Criminal Division, 6 October 1983, Journal de droit international.

⁴⁰ Sec Mallein, J., La situation juridique des non-combattants dans les conflits armés non internationaux, Université des Sciences sociales de Grenoble, thesis, roneo, 1978, p. 413.Google Scholar

⁴¹ See Perruchoud, R., Les résolutions des conférences Internationales de la Croix-Rouge, Geneva, Henry Dunant Institute, 1979, p. 105 ff.Google Scholar

⁴² See the work of the International Law Institute on “The application of the law of war to the military operations of the United Nations”, I.L.I. Annual, 1971, vol. 54.Google Scholar

⁴³ Geneva Conventions of 1949: First Convention, Art. 8 and 10/Second Convention, Art. 8 and 10/Third Convention, Art. 8, 10 and 126/Fourth Convention Art. 9, 11 and 147; Additional Protocol I of 1977, Art. 5.

⁴⁴ Geneva Conventions of 1949: First Convention, Art. 52/Second Convention, Art. 53/Third Convention, Art. 132/Fourth Convention, Art. 149.

⁴⁵ Additional Protocol I of 1977, Art. 90.

⁴⁶ Draft article on the responsibilities of States, Art. 33, Annual of the International Law Commission (Ann. I.L.C.), 1980, Vol. II, 2nd part. pp. 33 ff.

⁴⁷ Ibid., p. 45; cf. for example, Additional Protocol I of 1977, Art. 51, para. 5; b, Art. 57, para. 2, Art. 58.

⁴⁸ See Brauner, A., Ces enfants out vécu la guerre, Paris, Ed. françaises, sociales, 1946, pp. 215 ff.Google Scholar