1 See Bassiouni, M. C./Nanda, P., A Treatise on International Criminal Law, Springfield, 1973;Google ScholarGlaser, S., Droit international pénal conventionnel, Brussels, 1970–78;Google ScholarSperduti, G., “Crimini internazionali”, Enciclopedia del diritto, XI, 1962, p. 337;Google ScholarRonzitti, N., “Crimini internazionali”, Enciclopedia giuridica, X, 1988;Google ScholarFrancioni, F., “Crimini internazionali”, Digesto delle discipline pubblicistiche, IV, 1988, P. 464.Google Scholar

2 On the problems arising from non-international armed conflicts, see Meron, T., “International criminalization of internal atrocities”, AJIL, 1995, human p. 554;Google ScholarGraditzky, T., “Individual criminal responsibility for violations of international humanitarian law committed in non-international armed conflicts”, IRRC, No. 322, March 1998, p. 29.Google Scholar

3 See Condorelli, L., Rosa, A. La, Scherrer, S. (eds), Les Nations Unies et le droit international humanitaire/The United Nations and International Humanitarian Law, Éditions Pedone, Paris, 1996.Google Scholar

4 See Schwarzenberger, G., International Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals, vol. II: The Law of Armed Conflict, Stevens, London, 1968, p. 15;Google ScholarÖgren, K., “Humanitarian law in the Articles of War decreed in 1621 by King Gustavus II Adolphus of Sweden”, IRRC, No. 313, July-August 1996, p. 438Google Scholar. The Swedish Articles of War had considerable influence in Europe; at the same time, crithey were based on the first continental models of the sixteenth century.

5 See Schwarzenberger, op. cit. (note 4), p. 462.

6 See Dinstein, Y., The Defence of “Obedience to Superior Orders” in International Law, Leyden, 1965;Google ScholarMuller-Rappard, E., L'ordre supérieur militaire et la responsabilité pénale du subordonné”, Paris, 1965;Google ScholarGreen, L.C., Superior Orders in National and International Law, Leyden, 1976;Google ScholarSacerdoti, G., “A proposito del caso Priebke: la responsabilità per l'esecuzione di ordini illegittimi costituenti crimini di guerra”, Rivista di diritto internazionale, 1997, p. 130;Google ScholarGaeta, P., “Rilevanza dell'ordine superiore nel diritto internazionale penale”, Rivista di diritto internazionale, 1998, p. 69.Google Scholar

7 According to Schwarzenberger, in a framework of quasi-international law, whose characteristic is “a state of de facto equality in which entities conduct their mutual relations as if they were subjects of international law”, the Holy Roman Empire “had degenerated to such an extent that relations between its members were conducted on a footistic hard to distinguish from international relations”, Op. cit. (note 4), p. 464.

8 Text in Schindler, D./Toman, J., The Laws of Armed Conflicts: A Collection of Conventions, Resolutions and other Documents, Martinus Nijhoff/Henry Dunant Institute, Dordrecht/Geneva, 3rd ed., 1988, p. 5.Google Scholar

9 Text in The Treaties of Peace 1919–1923, vol. I, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New York, 1924, p. 121.Google Scholar

10 Texts in Scott, J.B., The Hague Conventions and Declarations of 1899 and 1907, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, New York, 1915;Google Scholar Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8).

11 “On the request of a belligerent, an enquiry shall be instituted, in a manner to be decided between the interested parties, concerning any alleged violation of the Convention; when such violation has been established the belligerents shall put an end to and repress it as promptly as possible.” (Art. 30). Text in Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 325.

12 “Serious violations of the laws and customs of war” is a broader concept than that of “grave breaches”.

13 On State responsibility, see Ago, R., Scritti sulla responsabilità internazionale degli Stati, 2 vol., Napoli, 1978–1986;Google ScholarBrownlie, I., State Responsibility, Oxford, 1983.Google Scholar On crimes of State, see also Weiler, J./Cassese, A./Spinedi, M. (eds), International Crimes of State, Berlin, 1989;Google ScholarCarella, G., La responsabilità dello Stato per crimini internazionali, Napoli, 1985;Google Scholar A. Cassese, “Remarks on the present legal regulation of crimes of States”, B. Conforti, “In tema di responsabilità degli Stati per crimini internazionali”, and Sahovic, M., “Le concept du crime international de l'État et le développement du droit international”, in Essays in Honour of Roberto Ago, Milano, 1987.Google Scholar

14 “Pour la première fois, les crimes de guerre, les crimes contre la paix, les crimes contre l'humanité sont expressément prévus et définis dans leurs éléments constitutifs par un texte conventionnel”, Daillier, P./Pellet, A., Droit international public, Paris, 1999, p. 676.Google Scholar See also Greig, D.W.International Law, London, 1976, p. 115;Google ScholarGiuliano, M./Scovazzi, T./Treves, T., Diritto internazionale, Parte generale, Milano, 1991, p. 183.Google Scholar

15 Art. 1 of the London Agreement for the Prosecution and Punishment of the Major War Criminals of the European Axis, of 8 August 1945, in Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 911.

16 See Schwelb, E., “Crimes against humanity”, BYIL, 1946, p. 178;Google ScholarGraven, J., “Les crimes contre l'humanité”, RCADI, 1950, 1, p. 427;Google ScholarBassiouni, M. C., Crimes Against Humanity in International Criminal Law, Dordrecht, 1992;Google ScholarZoller, E., “La définition des crimes contre l'humanité”, journal du droit international, 1993, p. 549.Google Scholar

17 There is no longer any reference to the “sanctity” of treaties, as compared with Art. 227 of the Versailles Treaty.

18 A similar provision (with fewer specifications) is to be found in the Statute of the Tokyo Tribunal, Art. 5.

19 Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 November 1945 – 1 October 1946, Official Documents and Proceedings, Nuremberg, 1947. See also Taylor, T., The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials, New York, 1992;Google ScholarJackson, R.H., The Nümberg Case, New York, 1948,Google Scholar and The Case Against the Nazi War Criminals, New York, 1945; de Vabres, H. Donnedieu, “Le procès de Nuremberg devant les principes modernes du droit pénal international”, RCADI, 1947, 1, p. 481;Google ScholarMerle, M., Le procès de Nuremberg et le châtiment des grands criminels de guerre, Paris, 1949;Google Scholar Schwarzenberger, op. cit. (note 4), p. 467; Ginsburg, G./Kuriastev, V. (eds), The Nuremberg Trial and International Law, Dordrecht, 1990.Google Scholar On the Tokyo Tribunal, see Röling, B./Cassese, A., The Tokyo Trial and Beyond, Oxford, 1993.Google Scholar

20 Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 921.

21 “Article 6 of the Nuremberg Charter has since come to represent general international law.” Brownlie, I., Principles of Public International Law, Oxford, 1991, p. 562.Google Scholar Along the same lines, Shaw, M., International Law, Cambridge, 1998, p. 471Google Scholar; Daillier/Pellet, op. cit. (note 14), p. 677.

22 Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 923.

23 Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 231. See also Brownlie, op. cit. (note 21), p. 562; Lemkin, R., “Genocide as a crime under international law”, AJIL, 1947, p. 145;Google ScholarKunz, J. L., “The United Nations Convention on genocide”, AIIL, 1949, p. 738;Google ScholarRobinson, N., The Genocide Convention: A Commentary, New York, 1960.Google Scholar

24 Reservations to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Advisory Opinion of 18 May 1951, I.C.J. Reports, 1951, p. 23.

25 Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 367. See also the commentaries published under the general editorship of Jean S. Pictet, ICRC, Geneva, 1952–1956; Draper, G.I.A.D., “The Geneva Conventions of 1949”, RCADI, 1965, 1, p. 59.Google Scholar

26 Doucet, G., “La qualification des infractions graves au droit international humanitaire”, in Kalshoven, F./Sandoz, Y. (Eds), Implementation of International Humanitarian Law, Dordrecht/Boston/London 1987, p. 79.Google Scholar

27 But there is no doubt that grave breaches constitute “war crimes”. See Brownlie, op. cit. (note 21), p. 563; Gutteridge, J.A.C., “The Geneva Conventions of 1949”, BYIL, 1949, p. 294.Google Scholar

28 Art. 28, Schindier/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 745. Art. 85, para, 4(d) of the 1977 Protocol I makes also attacks against historic monuments, works of art or places of worship under certain conditions a war crime. See Frigo, M., La protezione dei beni culturali nel diritto internazionale, Milano, 1986;Google ScholarToman, J., The Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, Paris, 1996.Google Scholar

29 Texts in Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 621. See also Sandoz, Y./Swinarski, C./Zimmermann, B., Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, ICRC/Martinus Nijhoff, Geneva, 1987.Google Scholar

30 Op. cit. (note 20).

31 Statute of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, adopted 25 May 1993 by SC Resolution 827/1993; text in UN Doc. S/25704 (1993). See also David, E., “Le Tribunal international pénal pour l'ex-Yougoslavie”, Revue belge de droit international, 1992, p. 565;Google ScholarPellet, A., “Le tribunal criminel international pour l'ex-Yougoslavie — Poudre aux yeux ou avancée décisive?”, Revue générale de droit international public, 1994, p. 7;Google ScholarShraga, D./Zacklin, R., “The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia”, European Journal of International Law, 1994, p. 360;Google ScholarCassese, A., “The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia”, in Studi Panzera, Bari, 1995, 1, p. 235Google Scholar; Carella, G., “II Tribunale penale internazionale per la ex-Yugoslavia”, in Picone, P. (ed.), Interventi delle Nazioni Unite e diritto internazionale, Padova, 1995, p. 463;Google Scholar P. Tavernier, “The experience of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda”, and Roberge, M. C., “Jurisdiction of the ad hoc Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda over crimes against humanity and genocide”, IRRC, No. 321, November-December 1997, pp. 605 and 651 respectively.Google Scholar

32 The Statute lists genocide and crimes against humanity in the first place and adds a reference to Art. 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and to 1977 Additional Protocol II. The peculiar context of the Rwanda conflict explains these differences.

33 UN Doc. A/CONF. 183/9. Final Act: UN Doc. A/CONF. 183/10. See also qLattanzi, F. (ed.), The International Criminal Court: Comments on the Draft Statute, Napoli, 1998;Google ScholarLattanzi, F./Sciso, E. (eds.), Dai Tribunal penali internazionali ad hoc a una Corte permanente, Napoli, 1996;Google ScholarUngari, P./Malintoppi, M.P. Pietrosanti, Verso un Tribunale permanente internazionale sui crimini contro l'umanità, Roma, 1997.Google Scholar

34 Donat-Cattin, “Crimes against humanity”, in Lattanzi (ed.), op. cit. (note 33), p. 49.

35 Decision of 29 November 1996, UD Doc. IT-96–22-T.

36 This principle was already stated by the ICTY in the Tadic case, judgement of 7 May 1997, UN Doc. IT-9 4–1-T. The Statute of the Rwanda Tribunal makes no distinction, because most of the crimes committed in the first period lacked the character of having taken place in a conflict situation.

37 See Miyazaki, S., “The Martens Clause and international humanitarian law”, in Swinarsky, C. (ed.), Studies and Essays in Honour of jean Pictet, ICRC, Geneva, 1984, p. 433;Google ScholarBenvenuti, P., “La clausola Martens e la tradizione classica del diritto naturale nellla codificazione del diritto dei conflitti armati”, in Scritti degli allievi in onore di Giuseppe Barile, Padova, 1995, p. 171.Google Scholar

38 See Meron, T., “Rape as a crime under international humanitarian law”, AJIL, 1993, p. 424Google Scholar; Askin, K.D., War Crimes against Women, Prosecution in International Law, The Hague, 1997.Google Scholar

39 Art. 88, Articles of War, in Ögren, op. cit. (note 4), p. 441.

40 UN Doc. IT-95–5-R61.

41 See Jescheck, H. H., “War crimes”, Encyclopedia of Public International Law, 4, p. 294Google Scholar; Dinstein, Y./Tabory, M. (eds), War Crimes in International Law, The Hague/Boston/London, 1996;Google ScholarMcCormack, T.L.H./Simpson, J. (Eds.), The Law of War Crimes. National and International Approaches, The Hague/Boston/London, 1997;Google ScholarZanardi, P. Lamberti/Venturini, G. (eds), Crimini di guerra e competenza delle giurisdizioni nazionali, Milano, 1998;Google Scholar C. Keith Hall, “The jurisdiction of the permanent International Criminal Court over violations of humanitarian law”, in Lattanzi, op. cit. (note 33), p. 19; Lachs, M., War Crimes: An Attempt to Define the Issues, London, 1945.Google Scholar Daillier/Pellet, op. cit. (note 14), p. 679: “La structure interne d'apparence complexe répond à un souci d'efficacité face à la diversité des conflits armés – internationaux et non internationaux – et à l'opposabilité variable des acquis conventionnels de 1949 et de 1977 aux États.”

42 M. C. Roberge, “The new International Criminal Court: A preliminary assessment”, IRRC, No. 325, December 1998, p. 674.

43 No doubt, these provisions must be interpreted in a very strict way.

44 B. Conforti, Diritto internazionale, Napoli, 1997, p. 204.

45 Trial of the major war criminals before the International Military Tribunal, op. cit. (note 19), p. 253.

46 Ibid., pp. 301–304 and 317–320. See also Oppenheim, L., International Law, Jenning, R. and Watts, A. (eds), Part 2, London, 1992, p. 996.Google Scholar

47 Adopted on 26 November 1968. Text in Schindler/Toman, op. cit. (note 8), p. 925.

48 Yearbook of the International Law Commission, vol. 11, 1954.

49 Text in Yearbook of the International Law Commission, vol. 11(2), 1996.

50 Judgment of 7 December 1945, UN War Crimes Commission, 4 Law Reports of the Trials of War Criminals, 1948,3.

51 E. Greppi, “Diritto intemazionale umanitario dei conflitti armati e diritti umani: profili di una convergenza”, in La comunità internazionale, 1996, 473. On the relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights law, see the bibliography in IRRC, No. 324, September 1998, p. 572.

52 See L. Condorelli, “II sistema della repressione dei crimini di guerra nelle Convenzioni di Ginevra del 1949 e nel primo Protocollo addizionale del 1977”, in Lamberti Zanardi/Venturini, op. cit. (note 41), p. 26. Also: Meron, T., “War crimes in Yugoslavia and the development of international law”, AJIL, 1994, p. 70Google Scholar; A. Cassese, “The International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the implementation of international humanitarian law”, in op. cit. (note 3), p. 229.

53 The 50th anniversary offers an excellent opportunity for reflection, because “some anniversaries are bound to evoke powerful memories” (C. Sommaruga, “Humanitarian challenges on the threshold of the twenty-first century”, IRRC, No. 310, January-February 1996, p. 20). On the role of the ICRC and with that of the United Nations, see H.P. Gasser, “The International Committee of the Red Cross and the United Nations involvement in the implementation of international humanitarian law”, in op. cit. (note 3), p. 259.