1

Protected Persons (I) – Wounded, Sick and

Shipwrecked

The classification “protected person” can mean many things. While it always

designates those individuals who benefit from protection within the framework of IHL,

the types of individuals may vary depending upon which convention accords the

protection:

- Wounded and sick in armed forces in the field for Convention I;

- Wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of armed forces at sea for

Convention II;

- Prisoners of war for Convention III;

- Civilian persons in time of war for Convention IV.

This document will limit its focus to protected persons as defined by Geneva

Conventions I and II (a forthcoming document will consider prisoners of war and

civilians in time of war). As a point of departure, the terms “wounded”, “sick” and

“shipwrecked” will be defined within the context of IHL.

1. Introduction

The terms “wounded” and “sick” apply to persons who as the result of trauma,

suffer from disease or other physical or mental illness or disability, and who require

medical treatment while abstaining from any hostile acts. This definition taken from

article 8 (a) of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions (“Protocol I”) both

broadens and narrows the normal understandings of these words. On one hand, this

definition is broader in that it includes those persons who are not wounded or sick in the

ordinary sense of the words but who need immediate medical care (pregnant women,

newborns, disabled, etc.). On the other hand, the definition is narrower because it only

protects those persons who refrain from participating in acts of hostility (a wounded

soldier may still make use of his weapon).

This same article 8 of Protocol I defines “shipwrecked” in paragraph (b) by

specifying that it covers those persons who find themselves in a perilous situation at sea

or in other waters due to misfortune affecting them or affecting the vessel or aircraft

carrying them, and who refrain from committing any hostile acts. Protocol I continues by

specifying that, so long as they abstain from engaging in any hostile acts, these persons

will continue to be considered “shipwrecked” during their rescue until they have acquired

another status under the Conventions or Protocol I: status as protected person pursuant to

Article 4 of the Fourth Convention if the “shipwrecked” is a civilian and is disembarked

in a harbour belonging to the enemy; if the “shipwrecked” is a serviceman, he may get

combatant status if collected by his own forces, internee status if collected by a neutral

warship or disembarked in a neutral harbour, prisoner of war status if, lastly, he is

2

collected by the enemy armed forces. In all cases, the “shipwrecked” also retains his

status as wounded or sick to the extent his health situation warrants it. The exercise of the

right of search and surrender granted to warships vis-à-vis hospital ships and merchant

vessels may also bring a change in the status of the “shipwrecked” (See Articles 31 and

14 of Convention II, respectively). Lastly, individuals who find themselves in a

hazardous situation on land (polar areas, desert, jungle), and those whose hazardous

situation is not the result of misfortune but of a voluntary action, such as the

accomplishment of a mission (military commando, frogman), are not to be considered

“shipwrecked”; in this very last case, however, these individuals would be granted

“shipwrecked” status should they renounce their mission or any other act of hostility.

2. General obligations of Parties to a conflict to respect and protect

the wounded, sick and shipwrecked

A. Essential concepts to acquire

The fundamental principle underlying the obligations of Parties to a conflict vis-à-

vis the wounded, sick and shipwrecked can be found in article 12 of the first Geneva

Convention of 1949, “Members of the armed forces and other persons mentioned in the

following Article, who are wounded or sick, shall be respected and protected in all

circumstances.” In a nutshell, this article encapsulates the core of principles elaborated by

Henry Dunant in his work “A Memory of Solferino.” Article 10, paragraph 1, of Protocol

I repeats this responsibility, but further extends its field of application by specifying that

“All the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, to whichever Party they belong, shall be

respected and protected.” In other words, this protection is no longer limited only to

combatants and other groups listed in article 13 of the first Convention, but also includes

the entire civilian population.

The question therefore arises as to what exactly this obligation to respect and

protect entails. On this point, the Commentary of Protocol I (p. 146) specifies that “to

respect” means ‘to spare, not to attack’, while ‘protect’ means ‘to come to someone's

defence, to lend help and support’. Thus it is prohibited to attack the wounded, sick or

shipwrecked, to kill them, maltreat them or injure them in any way, and there is also an

obligation to come to their rescue. From this analysis one can conclude that these

obligations of respect and protection impose – inter alia – upon Parties to a conflict:

- To treat the wounded, sick and shipwrecked within their power, without any

discrimination against sex, race, nationality, religion, political opinion or other

similar criterion (only reasons of medical urgency may justify prioritizing the

order of care);

- To treat protected persons with humanity and to not threaten their lives or

their persons; in particular, acts of torture are strictly forbidden;

- To not carry out medical or scientific experiments, nor purposely leave

persons without medical help or treatment, nor knowingly expose them to

risks of contagion or infection (See articles 15, 16 and 17 of Convention I and

articles 18, 19 and 20 of Convention II). Those obligations to respect and to

3

protect the wounded, sick and shipwrecked also apply to non-international

armed conflicts (See Common Article 3 (1) to the four Geneva Conventions

and article 8 of Additional Protocol II).

Those obligations may see their implementation facilitated through the setting up

of hospital zones and localities that impose the suspension of hostilities in space, and the

declaration of truce that suspends them in time.

B. Bibliographical references

• See the document from “Basic rules of the Geneva Conventions and their

Additional Protocols”, available on the ICRC website, at:

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/icrc_002_0365.pdf. This document

also contains some remarks about the protection of medical personnel, units and

transportation, which will be developed infra.

• DOSWALD-BECK (Louise), HENCKAERTS (Jean-Marie), Customary

International Humanitarian Law, ICRC, Bruylant, Brussels, 2005, Chapter 34, pp.

396-405.

• SASSOLI/BOUVIER/QUINTIN, pp. 230-232.

• SOLF (W.A.), “Development of the Protection of the Wounded, Sick and

Shipwrecked under the Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions”,

in: Etudes et essais sur le droit international humanitaire et sur les principes de la

Croix-Rouge en l’honneur de Jean Pictet, CICR, Genève, 1984, pp. 237-248.

C. Do I know?

• What are the fundamental concepts governing the obligation to respect and protect

the wounded, sick and shipwrecked in non-international armed conflicts?

• Can I identify the main differences with the treaty law applicable in international

armed conflicts?

• What is the current relevant customary law for both international armed conflicts

and for non-international armed conflicts?

3. The protection of medical and religious personnel, as well as

medical establishments and mobile medical units

A. Essential Concepts to acquire

Medical personnel are the personnel exclusively tasked with the search for, the

collection of, transport or treatment (including first aid) of the wounded, sick and

shipwrecked, as well as with the prevention of illness, and include personnel who

administer medical units or medical transports. This designation therefore includes

different categories of persons defined by article 8 (c) of Protocol I including, but not

limited to, military and civil medical personnel of a Party to the conflict who are assigned,

4

either permanently or temporarily1, to these tasks by a Party to the conflict. Religious

personnel include those persons, military or civilian – such as chaplains, rabbis, mullahs

– who are exclusively devoted to a religious ministry (regardless of which religion they

practice).

Medical units are defined as establishments and other units (whether fixed or

mobile) organized in order to provide the services mentioned supra for medical personnel.

Article 8 (e) of Protocol I makes express reference to hospitals, blood transfusion centres,

preventative medicine centres and institutes, as well as medical depots and the medical

and pharmaceutical stores of such units.

Medical transportation indicates the conveyance by land, water or air of the

wounded, sick, shipwrecked or medical supplies protected by IHL. On land, it refers

primarily to ambulances (article 35 of Geneva Convention I); on water, to hospital ships

(articles 22 to 35 of Convention II), and by air, to medical aircraft (articles 35 to 36 of

Convention I and 24 to 31 of Protocol I).

Medical and religious personnel, medical units and medical transports (whether

military or civil) as well as medical supplies must be respected and protected. This duty

of respect and protection of personnel is the logical corollary to fulfilling the

responsibilities of caring for war victims, including preventing all direct attacks on

protected persons and objects. However, further obligations flow from the responsibility

of the competent authorities to ensure that the medical establishments and units

mentioned above are, as far as possible, located such that subsequent attacks against

military objectives are not likely to put these establishments and units in danger.

Only personnel and units exclusively assigned to medical or religious functions

benefit from this special protection. From this one can infer, for example, that a medical

unit accompanying a combat unit whose personnel have the right to participate directly in

hostilities does not enjoy such protection. Furthermore, protected status is only conferred

upon personnel, units and transports assigned to medical duties by a Party to the conflict.

Other persons working in similar capacity are also protected, but only as civilians.

The protected status of medical personnel is nevertheless only accorded so long as

they refrain from committing any act of hostility against the enemy. IHL does not

precisely define acts of hostility. However, it does provide some guidance by listing acts

that cannot be considered as hostile, including being guarded by a sentry or armed escort,

or carrying light individual weapons for their own defence or to defend the wounded and

sick in their care (against, for example, criminal acts perpetrated by mobs or looters).

Nevertheless, once personnel or medical units commit hostile acts, their protection will

still not cease until after a warning has been given which sets, as appropriate, a

reasonable time limit in which to cease the hostile activities. Only after such warning has

remained unheeded will the personnel lose their protected status.

1 When the medical personnel are temporary, this protection only applies so long as the personnel is

carrying out the medical services or if the personnel fall under the power of the enemy.

5

Special conditions apply to the loss of protection of medical transports by sea or by

air. Hospital ships, as for any medical unit, have to be respected and protected. However,

three conditions have to be fulfilled for them to benefit from such immunity: notification

to the parties to the conflict (Article 22 of Convention II); exclusive use (Articles 30 and

33 of Convention II); and marking (Article 43 of Convention II2). As for medical aircrafts,

their level of protection depends on the area where they operate – areas not controlled by

the adverse Party, contact or similar zones, areas controlled by an adverse Party (Articles

24 to 30 of Additional Protocol I).3

The respect and protection of medical and religious personnel, medical units and

medical transports are crafted to maintain their ability to provide humanitarian services,

in particular to not prevent without good cause access to victims. More precisely, medical

personnel should be able to access areas where their services are required, to the extent

that security and logistical measures of the interested Party allow. In effect, in order to

accomplish the activities which justify their protection, it is necessary that these

personnel, units and transports are able, to the extent that circumstances permit, to have

access to victims.

In the context of civilian medical personnel, this principle of freedom of movement

is subject to two conditions. The first is functional: the freedom of medical personal is

limited to “any place where their services are essential”. The term “essential” must not be

used too restrictively; it is not limited only to emergency situations (for example, on the

battlefield) but merely requires that the access be for medical reasons. Beyond the access

justified by the services they provide, the movement of civilian medical personnel may be

restricted in the same manner as the rest of the civilian population. The second limit

concerns restrictions related to controls (of identity), or of security (against spying or

sabotage) as required by the interested Party to the conflict, i.e. the Party who has

effective control over the territory to which access is sought. This party must,

nevertheless, fulfill its obligations of maintaining public health within the territory over

which it has control.

Medical supplies are also protected; specifically, they must not be intentionally

destroyed. In addition, article 33 of Geneva Convention I requires that the supplies of

mobile medical units of the armed forces which fall into the hands of the enemy must be

reserved for the care of wounded and sick. In the case of the buildings, material and

stores of fixed medical establishments of the armed forces, these may not be diverted

from that purpose as long as they are required for the care of wounded and sick.

Nevertheless, the commanders of forces in the field may make use of them, in case of

urgent military necessity, provided that they make prior arrangements for the welfare of

the sounded and sick for whom they care for.

2 On the protection (and the loss of protection) of hospital ships, see also San Remo Manual on

International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, notably Rules 47 to 51, as well as Rules 169 to

173. 3 On the protection (and the loss of protection) of medical aircrafts, see also San Remo Manual on

International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, notably Rules 53 and 54, as well as Rules 174 to

183. See also the Section L of the Manual on International Law Applicable to Air and Missile Warfare,

dedicated to the special protection of medical aircrafts.

6

B. Bibliographical references

DOSWALD-BECK (Louise), HENCKAERTS (Jean-Marie), Customary

International Humanitarian Law, ICRC, Bruylant, Brussels, 2005, Chapter 7, pp.

79-104.

San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea,

adopted on 12 June 1994, at:

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/560?OpenDocument.

HPCR Manual on International Law applicable to Air and Missile Warfare, Bern,

15 May 2009, at: http://www.ihlresearch.org/amw/manual/.

KLEFFNER (Jann K.), “Protection of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked”, in:

FLECK (Dieter), The Handbook of Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts, Oxford

University Press, 2008, pp. 325-358.

C. Do I know?

What are the applicable rules relative to the protection of personnel, medical units

and transports applicable in non-international armed conflicts?

What is the state of international customary law in both international and non-

international armed conflicts?

What are the rules that regulate protection of medical ships?

May medical ships use encrypted communications? What guidance does the “San

Remo Manual” (available at:

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/560?OpenDocument) offer on this subject?

What is the legal binding nature of the Manuel of San Remo?

What are the rules applicable to the protection of medical air transports? Can I

identify the main differences in this regard between the provisions of the Geneva

Conventions and the Additional Protocol I? What are the differences on this issue

between the rules of the Additional Protocol I and those of the Manual on

International Law applicable to Air and Missile Warfare? What are the reasons

invoked to justify such differences? What is the legal scope of this Manual on the

Air and Missile Warfare?

D. Case study

Facts:

The newspaper “Le Monde” obtained a memorandum issued by a special meeting

of the Ministers of the Government of San Juan reporting many events that had taken

place in an armed conflict between San Juan and l’Heyrissera. The events are denounced

as flagrant violations of international humanitarian law. The Minister of Defence of San

Juan convenes an emergency meeting of its different branches in order to discuss the

thorny legal problems at issue. However, this meeting aims also to quell the wave of

strong criticism that has erupted in international media.

Documents

7

a. Confidential communication

TOP SECRET

Armed forces of San Juan

Department of General K. As TOIPRANDLER – Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of

Staff of the armed forces Re: Recent events

To: Judge Advocate General of the Army;

Judge Advocate General of the Navy;

Judge Advocate General of the Army, Special Operations;

Judge Advocate General of the Army, Psychological Operations

Regrets: Judge Advocate General of the Air Force (crisis management)

HIGHEST PRIORITY. The recent events of the last few days have brought strong criticism from the

international media damaging the image and credibility of our armed forces and our

government. The local press of Heyrissera has evidently led the pack, but other media

outlets repeatedly write about the “lack of respect of San Juan for aerial navigation”,

“unjustified direct attacks on civilian aircraft in flight,“ or even further “grave and

repeated violations of international humanitarian law.” It is therefore imperative to react

as quickly as possible to counter this press campaign.

You are summoned to a meeting in my office this morning along with the press secretary,

Colonel Poor Leter NITE. I invite you, the recipients of this letter, to participate in

discussions regarding potential violations of law which may have been committed by

your respective departments, and in cases where violations have occurred, to decide

which heads must roll. In addition, I want you to present to Colonel NITE the main points

for a press release that will put a positive spin on events for the media. It is imperative

that our press release is legally sound in order to prevent all future criticism by the

international press.

b. Article of Le Monde

San Juan and Heyrissera are guilty of flagrant violations of humanitarian

law: the war rages on

Le Monde was able to obtain a memorandum issued by an emergency meeting of

the Government Ministers of San Juan, which details the escalation of the situation as

well as numerous other events which took place in the region.

The Memo relates the following facts:

Thursday, March 2, around 10:10 AM. An aircraft flying at least 30 miles East off

the coast of Felicity Island is detected by our radars. Around 10:35 AM, the aircraft

suddenly abandons its Northeasterly direction as well as the aerial corridor reserved for

civilian air transportation and heads directly towards the island from a distance of

approximately 17 miles. Fearing an enemy or terrorist attack against its ship located less

8

than 2 miles away, the captain of the frigate 'Metoila I' radios a message to the aircraft.

After receiving no response, and aware of the urgency of the situation, he fires a missile

one minute after sending his message. The aircraft is destroyed, causing the death of 5

passengers. The first steps of the investigation reveal that the aircraft in question was

leased by an obscure company which is based in Niadu and specializes in oil exploration.

The aircraft had been on a mission to photograph a potential oil find in the area.

Morning of Friday, March 3. New incidents break out in the West of country

between unidentified armed groups and government armed forces. Immediately after the

shots were exchanged, two aircraft bearing the marks of a red frame on a white

background and a red cross inside the frame were immediately dispatched to the location

by the medical units of San Juan with the mission of urgently evacuating the wounded

members of the government's armed forces to the national hospital of San Juan City. No

other medical facility or medical transport is available in the immediate environment,

though the wounds of certain guerrillas require urgent medical care. The field

commander decides therefore to load all wounded and captured enemy members in a

troop-transport helicopter in order to transfer them under heavy surveillance to a

detention centre equipped with medical facilities located about fifty kilometres away.

After a few minutes in flight above the tropical forest, these three aircraft are attacked

and destroyed by the rebels.

Saturday, March 4, 2:15 PM. Following an aerial attack by San Juan, the

Heyrisseran submarine the 'Tanvatalo' is hit. The vessel, whose navigational controls

have been damaged and are now unresponsive, is carried by the current. It surfaces and

runs aground along the Northern coast of San Juan. Part of the crew embarks on rubber

boats and attempts to flee. There being insufficient rubber boats, another group –

including a few wounded – deploys distress buoys and hides along the shore waiting for

potential rescuers. The Heyrisseran authorities order by radio two privately owned

hydroplanes registered in Bakalo to change course and attempt to rescue the shipwrecked

crew; these are the two nearest hydro-planes to the location of the shipwreck. These

hydroplanes are intercepted immediately upon their unauthorized flight over our

territorial waters by our fighter planes. Upon the arrival of our planes, one of the

hydroplanes refuses to follow the instructions of our fighters and attempts to flee; the

hydroplane is shot down after it fails to respond to two calls. The second hydro-plane is

seized by the military authorities upon its landing in San Juan. The plans are to transform

it such that it can be used in the future by the San Juan Air Force.

Task: meet with the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces and Colonel Nite to discuss

the points mentioned in this confidential note. Meeting duration: 15 minutes.

4. Rights and duties of the medical and religious personnel

A. Essential Concepts to acquire

Medical and religious personnel have a number of duties. The primary ones are:

9

• To respect and protect the wounded and sick;

• To refrain from directly participating in hostilities; in this regard, they may only

carry light arms for self-defence and that of persons under their care;

• They must be easily distinguishable.

Medical and religious personnel also enjoy certain rights. Notably, they may not

be punished for carrying out medical activities compatible with medical ethics, regardless

of the person receiving care. Furthermore, these persons shall not be forced to perform

acts or carry out work contrary to the rules of medical ethics, or to refrain from carrying

out work required by those rules and provisions (article 16 Protocol I). “Medical

activities compatible with medical ethics” covers a relatively wide scope: the determining

factor is that the activity must have as its purpose the improvement of health or the

lessening of suffering of the wounded and sick. These activities do not include treatments

that are not related to the state of health of the wounded and sick (such as messages,

which could be transmitted to help him or her).

Furthermore, article 16(3) of Protocol I explicitly states that persons engaged in

medical activities shall not be compelled to provide information considering the wounded

and sick who are, or who have been, under his care if the care-giver believes that the

transmission of such information would prove harmful to the patients or to their families.

Medical personnel are likewise not required to provide information concerning the

wounded and sick to anyone belonging either to an adverse Party, or to his own Party

(except in cases where they are required by the law of their Party).

Infringements on the medical mission are as well violations of the obligations to

protect and to respect the wounded and sick; it may be also corollaries of the prohibitions

to carry out physical mutilation, or medical and scientific experiments that are not

required by the state of the person's health and / or are not in conformity with generally

accepted medical standards. Protection of medical units is also intrinsically linked with

the protection of medical personnel. Direct threats to the medical personnel (threats to kill,

to mistreat or to imprison) as well as indirect threats (threats against the family of the

medical personnel) result in coercion against the medical personnel. For military medical

personnel, a simple military order may even amount to duress, the sanctions for failure to

follow the order being very severe; however simple pressure such as removing or not

giving certain material benefits is not sufficient.

Military and religious personnel benefit from certain rights in case of capture by

an adverse Party. Permanent medical personnel (article 24 of Geneva Convention I) are

not accorded the status of prisoner of war. Nevertheless, medical personnel may be held

in order to provide care to prisoners of war, with preference given to those prisoners of

war belonging to the same Party. At such time that their detention is no longer

indispensable, members of the permanent medical personnel must be “returned to the

Party to the conflict to whom they belong” (article 30). In contrast, auxiliary medical

personnel (article 25 of Convention I) will be considered prisoners of war, but they will

be used in medical activities so long as their services are needed.

10

B. Bibliographical references

HAROUEL-BURELOUP (Véronique): Traité de droit humanitaire, Paris, PUF

(droit), 2005, Chapitre 5 – Droits et devoir du personnel sanitaire, pp. 243-257.

ICRC, "Health care in danger: the responsibilities of health personnel to work

in armed conflict and other emergencies," August 2012, available at:

https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/publications/icrc-002-4104.pdf.

PICTET (Jean), “The medical profession and humanitarian law”, International

Review of the Red Cross, vol. 25, 1985, pp. 191-209.

For more information, please consult, Ethical Codes and Declarations Relevant

to the Health Professions, An Amnesty International compilation of selected

ethical and human rights texts, 167 p., available at:

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/200000/act750051985en.pdf.

C. Do I know?

May medical personnel and medical units from a neutral third Party country be

held as prisoners of war?

Is the prohibition on communicating medical information absolute or are there

exceptions?

May tissue or organs for transplant be removed from the wounded and sick,

and if so, under what conditions?

5. Dead and missing persons

The first and second Geneva Conventions impose upon Parties to an armed

conflict at all times and without delay, the obligation to take all possible measures to

search for and collect the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, and to protect them against

pillage and ill- treatment. These two Conventions also oblige Parties to an armed conflict

at all times, and without delay, to take all possible measures to search for the dead and to

prevent that they are left abandoned (articles 15 and 18 respectively).

The Parties to the conflict also are obliged to record, without delay, any pertinent

information they possess that identifies the wounded, sick and dead of the adverse Party

who have fallen into their hands. This information must be communicated, always as

soon as possible, to the official information bureau for prisoners of war, who will then

transmit this information to the representative of the protecting Power and the central

Agency of prisoners of war (articles 16 and 19 of Conventions I and II respectively).

Finally, the Parties to the conflict have the obligation to ensure that the burial or

incineration of the dead – performed individually in all cases where circumstances permit

– are preceded by a careful, and if possible, medical examination of the body, with the

purposes of confirming death, establishing identity and preparing a report. Furthermore,

the Parties to the conflict must ensure that the dead are buried honourably, and if possible

according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are

respected and if possible grouped by nationality of the dead as well as properly

11

maintained and marked such that they may always be located (see Articles 17 and 20

respectively of Conventions I and II as well as article 34 of Protocol I).

One of the primary goals of these articles is to prevent the disappearance of

persons. Within the context of IHL, a person is generally considered missing when his or

her family is without news and / or that s/he was reported missing according to reliable

information in an armed conflict – international or non-international. In the specific

context of international armed conflicts, IHL imposes the obligation on belligerent parties

to take all possible measures to find out what happened to those people labelled as

missing. Article 33 (1) of Protocol I states that, “As soon as circumstances permit, and at

the latest from the end of active hostilities, each Party to the conflict shall search for the

persons who have been reported missing by an adverse Party.” Protocol I also accords the

right to families to know the fate of their relatives (article 32).

A. Bibliographical references

On the question of missing, see Fact sheet issued by the ICRC's Advisory Service,

“Missing persons and their family”, available at:

https://www.icrc.org/en/document/missing-persons-and-their-families-

factsheet#.VL1z1EfF81Y. This document contains recommendations for drafting

national legislation on that matter.

See also the article by Sophie Martin, “The missing”, in the special issue of the

International Review of the Red Cross, on that topic, n° 848, 2002, pp. 723-726,

available at https://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/irrc_848_martin.pdf. The

other contributions of this issue also constitute an important source to get

information.

B. Do I know?

What is the Information Bureau for prisoners of war and what are its primary

responsibilities insofar as the wounded and sick are concerned?

Under what conditions a body may be cremated? Why are the conditions imposed

upon cremation more restrictive than those imposed upon burial?

6. Distinctive signs and emblems

A. Essential Concepts to acquire

One of the goals of the first Geneva Convention of 1864 (Text no. 2 of the

Competition Compilation) was to adopt a unique emblem in order to facilitate the

identification of medical personnel and ambulances of armed forces on land. In order to

perform this function, this emblem had to be familiar to all, easy to reproduce and

recognizable from a distance. The red cross was chosen to fulfill these requirements.

Eventually, other States however wanted to use other emblems in place of the red cross,

and two (the red crescent and the red lion and sun) were recognized by the first Geneva

Convention in 1929. The Geneva Conventions of 1949 therefore recognize three

12

emblems. An additional emblem, the red crystal, was recognized in the third additional

Protocol to the Geneva Conventions adopted the 8th of December 2005.

These emblems may be used in two different ways. The protective use of the

emblem distinguishes medical units and establishments as well as the personnel and

supplies protected by the Geneva Conventions. In order to be effective in its protective

function, the emblem should be large enough to be visible from a distance. The indicative

use shows only that a person or an object is linked to the International Movement of the

Red Cross and Red Crescent. In this context, the emblem must be of a comparatively

smaller size and the conditions of its use must exclude all confusion with the emblem in

protective use. Taking into account the theme of this document – the protection of

wounded, sick and shipwrecked – emphasis will be made on the protective use of the

emblem. In this regard, IHL requires that Parties to a conflict ensure that military and

religious personnel, as well as medical units and transports, are able to be identified. In

particular, the emblem should be placed on their flags and armbands, as well as on other

medical supplies. Of special note is that the emblems may only be worn by the medical

personnel and units protected by IHL and only with the consent and under the control of

competent authorities. Annex 1 of Protocol I details other ways to clearly identify

medical units and transports through means of distinctive signals including light signals,

radio signals, or other electronic signals.

It is nevertheless clear that the use of signals is not a requirement to confer

protection. Certainly, distinctive emblems, signs or signals greatly facilitate effective

implementation of the protection. However, should an adverse Party have recognized the

protected nature of a person or object, it may not ignore such protection by invoking the

absence of these emblems, signs or signals.

As the goal of these distinctive signs and signals is to indicate that the persons or

objects who wear them is under a special international protection and therefore must not

be the object of an attack, all inappropriate or abusive use risks diminishing the

credibility of the protective regime. Usage is considered unjustified when it is used by

those persons or units that do not have the right to use the signs, or when persons and

units normally authorized to use the emblem do so in improper ways. Under certain

conditions, these acts may amount to perfidy.

B. Bibliographical references

On the historical aspects of the norms regulating the red cross and red crescent

emblems, see the ICRC document, “The History of the emblems”, available at:

https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/emblem-history.htm. For more

information, see, BUGNION, (François), “The emblem of the Red Cross: a brief history”,

ICRC, Geneva, 1977, p. 81.

On the current regulation of emblems, participants may consult the following

documents:

For the doctrinal aspect, see the short extract, “What are the provisions of

13

humanitarian law governing use of the emblem?”, from ICRC publication

“International humanitarian law: answers to your questions”, available at:

https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/5kze8s.htm.

For an analysis on recent development about that issue, see BUGNION,

(François), “Towards a comprehensive solution to the question of the emblem -

Revised fourth edition”, International Review of the Red Cross, No. 838, June

2000, pp. 427-478, and QUÉGUINER (Jean-François), “Commentary on the

Protocol additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to

the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III)”, International

Review of the Red Cross, No 865, 2007, pp. 175-208.

Finally, for more details, see: BOUVIER, (Antoine), “Special aspects of the use

of the red cross or red crescent emblem”, International Review of the Red Cross,

n° 272, 1989, pp. 438-458, available at:

https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jmba.htm.

See also ICRC, "Study on the use of the emblems: Operational problems and

commercial and other non-operational issues", 2011, available at the following

address: https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/emblem-study-

011009.htm.

C. Do I know?

Under what precise conditions may the emblem be used? Would your answer be

different if the State is or isn't a party to Protocol I?

Do the conditions to use the emblem differ depending on whether it is used in

time of peace or in times of armed conflict?

What are the obligations of the Parties to the Geneva Conventions and to the

additional Protocols in order to protect the emblems?

D. Compilation of texts and collection of documents

Regulations on the use of the Emblem of the Red Cross or the Red Crescent by

the National Societies adopted by the 20th Red Cross and Red Crescent

International Conference (Vienna, 1965) and revised by the Council of Delegates

(Budapest, 1991), available at:

https://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/article/other/57jmbg.htm.

E. Links to current events

Additional Protocol III, adopted on December 8, 2005, had as its goal the

adoption of an additional distinctive emblem. Please read the text of this Protocol

thoroughly in order to answer the following questions.

What problems were encountered in the regulation of emblems before 2005 that

justified the adoption of the third additional Protocol?

Was the third additional Protocol adopted by consensus or by majority vote?

14

Is the name of the emblem of the Additional Protocol III – the red crystal –

mentioned in this treaty? If no, by what means has it been established?

Does the third additional Protocol authorize incorporating, within the emblem of

the third Protocol, other emblems? If so, what are the emblems which can be

incorporated? May an emblem be incorporated no matter how the emblem is

used?

May a state that has chosen to use the red crescent to mark its medical and

religious services also use the red cross? If so, under what conditions?

Will the ICRC and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent

Societies change their names to reflect the new emblem? Are these members of

the Movement authorized to use the additional emblem? If so, under what

conditions may they do so?

Is the third additional Protocol in force? How many States are signatories to the

third additional Protocol? How many States have ratified it?