International humanitarian law: the essential rules by International Committee of the Red Cross 10:05am 3rd Jun, 2004   4-06-2004      These rules, drawn up by the ICRC, summarize the essence of international humanitarian law. They do not have the authority of a legal instrument and in no way seek to replace the treaties in force. They were drafted with a view to facilitating the promotion of the law.    * The parties to a conflict must at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants in order to spare the civilian population and civilian property. Neither the civilian population as a whole nor individual civilians may be attacked.    * Attacks may be made solely against military objectives. People who do not or can no longer take part in the hostilities are entitled to respect for their lives and for their physical and mental integrity. Such people must in all circumstances be protected and treated with humanity, without any unfavorable distinction whatever.    * It is forbidden to kill or wound an adversary who surrenders or who can no longer take part in the fighting.    * Neither the parties to the conflict nor members of their armed forces have an unlimited right to choose methods and means of warfare. It is forbidden to use weapons or methods of warfare that are likely to cause unnecessary losses or excessive suffering.    * The wounded and sick must be collected and cared for by the party to the conflict which has them in its power. Medical personnel and medical establishments, transports and equipment must be spared.    * The red cross or red crescent on a white background is the distinctive sign indicating that such persons and objects must be respected.    * Captured combatants and civilians who find themselves under the authority of the adverse party are entitled to respect for their lives, their dignity, their personal rights and their political, religious and other convictions. They must be protected against all acts of violence or reprisal. They are entitled to exchange news with their families and receive aid. They must enjoy basic judicial guarantees.    19-05-2004     Protecting Life and Dignity: "No War is above International Law", by Jakob Kellenberger .    (Jakob Kellenberger, is president of the International Committee of the Red Cross.This article was published in the Financial Times / UK) .    Events in Iraq and other recent armed conflicts have time and again reminded us that the essential dignity of human beings is often among the first casualties of war. Numerous offences are committed against civilians, wounded and sick combatants and those deprived of their liberty in armed conflicts around the world. This happens despite the fact that there is almost universal support for the Geneva Conventions, the treaties at the heart of international humanitarian law that oblige all parties to a conflict to protect the life and dignity of persons not or no longer fighting. The shocking events concerning detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq are unfortunately but one example of the violation of these laws and the values they embody.    To tackle violations of international humanitarian law committed in armed conflicts, simply paying lip service to the protection of human life and dignity is not enough. It is disturbing to note how often violations of international humanitarian law are shrugged off as "collateral damage" an appalling term when applied to human beings - or blithely justified as apparently unavoidable results of the quest for security. Frequently, commitments by governments, armies, rebel groups and other organisations to observe the principles of humanitarian law are nothing but empty rhetoric designed to cover up violations of those laws.    Yet, these laws were specifically designed to take account of both the legitimate security needs of states and the obligation to protect human life and basic rights. The ICRC is convinced that it is possible to achieve a balance between the two. One can control a territory while respecting its population, and one can detain those threatening public order while respecting their physical and spiritual integrity and without degrading or humiliating them.    The fact that the ICRC works in full independence from states and other actors allows it to credibly monitor to what extent they respect their obligations under international humanitarian law. The ICRC looks into alleged violations of such laws in places of detention and reports them to the responsible authorities, suggesting changes or demanding improvements where necessary. Its direct and confidential contacts with authorities enable the ICRC to regularly and repeatedly visit prisons and detention camps and thereby directly help prisoners whose rights may have been violated. Last year, ICRC delegates visited nearly 470,000 detainees in 80 countries, most of them far away from the media spotlight.    As I write this, our teams in Iraq are continuing to visit detainees held by the Coalition forces, always with a view to ensuring respect for the life and rights of those deprived of their liberty.    Since the September 11 terrorist attacks on America in 2001, acts intended to spread terror among civilians and the measures taken to stop them have taken on a new dimension. Terrorist acts that indiscriminately target and massacre civilians are a direct negation of the fundamental values at the heart of international law. The ICRC condemns such crimes without reservation. It also insists that the response to them must be carried out within the limits set by international law. When the fight against terror amounts to an armed conflict, states are obliged to observe the principles of international humanitarian law even when their security is at stake. This means that people deprived of their liberty cannot be detained and interrogated outside of an appropriate legal framework.    Some commentators seem to think that the threat of terrorism justifies a weakening of international law. They argue that the law should primarily serve the security needs of states, and that the legal protection of people against abuses of their dignity needs to be watered down in order to stop terrorist acts. I disagree. Any body of law must be continuously reassessed and developed to ensure its continued relevance. International humanitarian law is no exception; the ICRC is involved in discussions with governments and experts to ensure that it remains relevant. However, we will never accept a weakening of the legal provisions safeguarding the rights of people caught up in armed conflicts.    The struggle against terrorism can only be legitimate as long as it does not undermine basic values shared by humanity. The right to life and to protection against murder, torture and degrading treatment must be at the heart of the actions of all those involved in this struggle. This fight will lose credibility if it is used to justify acts otherwise considered unacceptable, such as the killing of people not participating in hostilities.    The world should not need any photographs of torture and ill treatment of prisoners to remember that the protection of human life and dignity is everyone's concern and requires action. Visit the related web page
	Next (more recent) news item
	Next (older) news item