* Reproduced from the Opinion and Judgment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, Case No. IT-94–1-T, May 7, 1997. The Table of Contents at I.L.M. Page 913 indicates the entire contents; I.L.M. has reproduced Appendix A (the Amended Indictment), pages 201 through 301 and the Separate and Dissenting Opinion of Judge McDonald.

[On July 14, 1997, v. Duško Tadić was sentenced to a 20-year prison term.

[The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction in Prosecutor v. Duško Tadić, October 2, 1995, discussing the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and the application of international humanitarian law to conflicts of an international character, appears at 35 I.L.M. 32 (1996), and the Judgment of the International Court of Justice in Nicaragua v. United States, June 27, 1986 appears at 25 I.L.M. 1023 (1986).]

42 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 81.

43 para. 89.

44 id, paras. 141-142

45 Id, para. 70.

46 Jean Pictet (gen. ed.) Commentary, Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Convention II (ICRC, Geneva, 1960), 33 (.“Commentary. Geneva Convention II“); Jean Piclet (gen. ed.) Commentary, Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Convention HI, (ICRC, Geneva, I960), 37 (“Commentary, Geneva Convention HI“).

47 (ICRC, Geneva, 1952)49-50.

48 See General Assembly Resolution 467237, U.N. Doc. A/RES/46/237.

49 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 67

50 See Security Council resolution 713, U.N. Doc S/RES/7I3 (1991).

51 Security Council resolution 757, U.R Doc S/RES/757 (1993).

52 See Security Council resolution 827, U.N. Doc S/RES/827 (1993).

53 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 70.

54 Sec Article 4,1.L.C. Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind, (“U.C Draft Code“) Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-eighth session, 6 May - 26 July 1996, G.A.O.R., 51st Sess, Supp. No. 10,30, U.N. Doc. A/51/10.

55 See Appeals Chamber Decision, paras.79-85.

56 Id. para. 81.

57 Geneva Convention IV, supra.

58 Jean Pictet (gen. ed.). Commentary, Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Convention IV, (ICRC Geneva, 1958), 47 ^Commentary. Geneva Convention IV“).

59 W.47.

60 Georg Schwarzenberger, international Law as applied by International Courts and Tribunals (Stevens Sons, London, 1968), Vol II, 174,176.

61 British Manual of Military Law, Part III (The Law of War on Land), (1958), para. 501.

62 Schwarzenberger, 317, supra.

63 Security Council Resolution 752, U.N. Doc. S/RES/752 (1992)

64 See Appeals Chamber Decision, paras. 73-77.

65 See Appeals Chamber Decision, para.73.

66 1 .A. Shearer, Starke 's International Law (11 ed, Butterworths, Sydney, 1994), 276.

67 Geneva Convention IV,supra.

68 Commentary, Geneva Convention IV, 212, supra.

69 See Appeals Chamber Decision, para.76.

70 1986 I.C.J.Repons,l4.

71 Id, para. 219.

72 Id. para. 109.

73 Id, para. 109.

74 Id, para. 115 (emphasis added).

75 para.109

76 para.112.

77 See Commentary to Article 8,.L.C. Draft Articles on State Responsibility, Report of the International law Commission on the Work of its Twenty-sixth session. Ybk I.L.C., 1974, Vol. II. Pt 1, 283-286, U.N. Doc A/9610/Rev.l.

78 Nicaragua case, supra, Sep. Op. Judge Ago, para. 16.

79 See Amerasinghe, Studies In International Law (1968), 2IS; Wedderbum, 6 I.C.L.Q. (1937)290.

80 Appeals Chamber Decision, paras. 89,98, 102; Nicaragua case, para. 218, supra.

81 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 94.

82 Id, para 9S; Nicaragua case, para. 218, supra.

83 See Nicaragua case, supra.

84 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 134.

85 London, 8 August 1945,85 U.N.T.S. 251.

86 See Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 138, citing the Report of the Secretary-General, para. 47, supra; see also Egon Schwelb, Crimes Against Humanity, 23 Brit. Ybk. Int'l L. 178,178 (1946).

87 See the Report of the Commission on the Responsibility of. the Authors of the War and on Enforcement of Penalties, established at the Peace Conference in Paris on 25 Jan 1919, which found, inter alia, that violations of “the elementary laws of humanity” had occurred. Reports of the Majority and Dissenting Reports of American and Japanese Members of the Commission of Responsibilities (Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1919). See also Declaration of 28 May 1915 of the Governments of France, Great Britain and Russia denouncing the massacres of the Armenian population in Turkey as “crimes against humanity and civilization for which all the members of the Turkish Government will be held responsible together with its agents implicated in the massacres”, quoted in Egon Schwelb, Crimes Against Humanity, 23 Brit. Ybk. InfiL. 178.181 (1946). See also History of the United Nations War Crimes Commission and the Development of Laws of War 32-38 (The United Nations War Crimes Commission: London, 1948) (“War Crimes Commission“).

88 War Crimes Commission, 188, supra.

89 Antonio Cassese, Violence and Law In the Modern Age 109(1988).

90 See Schv/e\b, supra al 183-187;jee afro War Crimes Commission supra at 174-177.

91 Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, Germany, (1947) (“NOmberg Judgment“) 219-224.

92 ld., 253-254.

93 Id

94 Id., 254-255.

95 Id. 254.

96 See Cherif Bassiouni, M., Crimes Against Humanity in International Criminal Law. 7, 114–119 (Martinus Nijhoffi Dordrecht, 1992)Google Scholar.

97 NOmberg Judgment, 174,218, supra

98 Id.218.

99 Article 5(c)

100 Official Gazette of the Control Council for Germany, No. 3, p. 22, Military Government Gazette, Germany, British Zone of Control, No. 5, p. 46, Journal Officiel du Commandemem en Chef Francais en Allemagne, No. 12 of 11 January 1946, Art. I!(c) (“Control Council Law No. 10“).

101 U.N.G.A. res. 95 (I) of 11 December 1946.

102 NOmberg Principles, Ybk I.L.C., 1950, Vols 1 and II.

103 Report of the Secretary-General, para. 35, supra.

104 See, e.g., the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity of 26 Nov. 1968* at Art I (deciding that no statutory limitation shall apply to crimes against humanity, “even if such acts do not constitute a violation of the domestic law of the country in which they were committed“); I.L.C. Draft Code at Art. 18 (including crimes against humanity as a crime against peace and security of mankind) and Art 2 (providing for individual responsibility for crimes against peace and security of mankind); the I.L.C.'s Draft Statute for a Permanent International Criminal Court, Report of the I.L.C. on the work of its Forty-sixth Session, U.N. Doc. CAXMt. A/49/10 CU.G Draft Statute^) at Art 20 (including crimes against humanity as a crime within the jurisdiction of the court and one which is a crime under general international law); the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (“Genocide Convention“), 9 Dec. 1948.78 U.N.T.S. 277, at Art 1 (noting that genocide is a crime under international law) and Art IV (establishing individual criminal responsibility), and the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid (“Convention on Apartheid“), 30 Nov. 1973, 1015 U.N.T.S. 243, at Art I (declaring that apartheid is a crime against humanity and that inhumane acts resulting from apartheid are crimes violating iniemational law) and Ait. Hi (attaching individual international criminal responsibility for the crime of apartheid).

105 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 141.

106 Id

107 Numberg Charter, Art. 6(c), supra.

108 Report of the Secretary-General para. 47, supra; see also f.LC. Draft Cede, 96, supra.

109 The Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda, (^Rwanda Statute“) Ait. 3.U.N. Doc S/RES/955 (1994).

110 Appeals Chamber Decision, f3O. 141.

111 Id, para. 78.

112 Id, para. 70.

113 Id, para. 78; see also id para. 141.

114 . para. 88.

115 See Provisional Verbatim Record of the 3217th Meeting, U.N. Doc. S/PVJ2I7 (2S May 1993), 11 (statement of France), 16 (statement of the United States, included in which was the statement that the United States understood that the other members of the Council shared its view), 45 (where the Russian Federation used the formulation “during an armed conflict” and 19 (where the United Kingdom used “in time of armed conflict“).

116 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 70.

117 Morris and Scharf, 83, supra.

118 Appeals Chamber Decision, paras. 67,70.

119 Prosecutor pre-trial brief filed 10 Apr.1996, quoting Appeals Chamber Decision; see also Nicaragua case, para. 218, supra.

120 See Article 50(3) of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (“Protocol I“) (ICRC, Geneva, 1977); see also Fédération Nationale des Déportés et Internés Résistants et Patriotes and Others v. Barbie (Barbie case); Final Report of the Commission of Experts Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992), (“Final Report of the Commission of Experts“), paras. 77-78, U.N. Doc. SI 1994/674

121 Appeals Chamber Decision, para. 102; see also Nicaragua case, para. 218,supra.

122 Protocol J, supra.

123 War Crimes Commission, 193, supra.

124 Henri Meyrowitt La r épression par les tribunaux allemands da crimes contre I'humani éi et de I'appartenancà une organisation criminelte 282 (1960) (unofficial translation).

125 Schwelb, \9\,supra.

126 Final Report of the Commission of Experts, para. 78, supra.

127 Id. para. 78.

128 (1985) I.L.R. 125.

129 Cited by the Cour de Cassation, Id. 139.

130 Id 140.

131 Id.

132 See Jean-Louis Clergerie, La notion de crime contre I'humani éi, Revue du Droit Public 1251, 1251 n.3(1988)

133 Id.128

134 .Id, 134,136.

135 The Prosecutor v. Mile Msktić, Miroslav Radić”, and Veselin Štjivančanin, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 61 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Case No. IT-95-I3-R61, T.Ch.l, 3 Apr. 1996 (Vukavar Hospital Decision“).

136 Id., para. 29.

137 Id., para.32.

138 See Schwelb, 191; supra; see also Memorandum of the Secretary-General on The Charter and Judgement of the Nümberg Tribunal; History and Analysis, 67 (U.N. Publication, Sales No. 1949, V. 7).

139 Decision on the Form of the Indictment, supra.

140 War Crimes Commission, 119, supra.

141 Report of the Secretary-General, para. 48,supra.

142 Nümberg Judgment. 247. supra, (emphasis added).

143 Vukovar Hospital Decision, para. 30, supra.

144 Report of the Committee on the Establishment of a Permanent International Criminal Court (“Report of the Ad Hoc Committee“), U.N. Doc. G.A.O.R. A/50/22 (1995) at 17.

145 I.L.C Draft Code, supra.

146 Report of the l.LC. on the work of its Forty-ninth Session, (1994) G.A.O.R., 49th sess, Supp. No. 10, U.N. Doc A/49/10, p. 76, emphasis added.

147 Report of the International law Commission on the Work of its Forty-third Session, (1991) G.A.O.R, 46lh sess. Supp. No. 10. U.N. Doc A/46/10 CU-C. 1991 Report“), at265

148 I.L.C. Draft Code, 94-95, supra.

149 See the Trial of Josef Altstötter and Other's (“Justice case“), Vol. VI, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals (U.N. War Crimes Commission London, 1949) (“Law Reports “) 79-80 and see the Trial ofFredrlch Flick and Five Others CFlick case“), Vol. IX, law Reports, 5 1, in which isolated cases of atrocities and persecution were held to be excluded from the definition of crimes against humanity.

150 Report of I.L.C. Special Rapporteur D. Thiam, Ybk J.L.C. 1986, Vol. II, I.L.C. A/CN.4/466 (^Report of the Special Rapporteur“), para. 93, referring to the conclusion of Henri Meyrowitz.

151 Henri Meyrowitz quoted in Report of Special Rapporteur, para. 89, supra.

152 Vukovar Hospital Decision, para. 30, supra.

l53 See, e.g.,.cases 2,4, 13,14, 15,18,23,25,31 and 34 of Entscheidungen Des Obersten Gerichtshofes FUr Die Britische Zone in Strafsachen, Vol. I.

154 See, e.g.. Barbie case supra, the Final Report of the Commission of Experts, para. 84, supra, t. Graven, Les crimes contre I'humaniti, Receuil de Cours (1950) and Catherine Grynfogel, Le concept de crime contre Vhumaniii: filer, aujourd'hul it demaln, Revue de Droit Penal ct de Criminologie 13 (1994); but see Leila Sadat Wexler, The Interpretation of the Nuremberg Principles by the French Court of Cassation: From Touvier to Barbie and Back Again, 32 Colum. J. Trans. L. 289 (1994).

155 See the Medical Case, Vol. II Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10,181,196-98 (Washington: US Govt Printing Office 1950).

156 Memorandum of the Secretary-General on the Charter and Judgment of the Nurnberg Tribunal, 67, supra.

157 U.N. Doc S/RES/955 (1994).

158 Amnesty International. The International Criminal Court: Afalting the Right Choices - Part 1 40 (1997). ‘

159 Report of the Secretary-General, para. 48, supra.

160 See Provisional Verbatim Record, 11 (statement of France, listing national, ethnic, racial and religious grounds), 16 (statement of the United States, listing national, political, ethnic racial, gender and religious grounds) and 45 (statement of the Russian Federation, listing national, political, ethnic, religious or other grounds), supra.

161 75 I.L.R. 362-63 (1987).

162 See also Barbie case 137, supra.

163 Bassiouni, 248-249, supra.

164 The Prosecutor v. Dragan Nikolć, Review of the Indictment Pursuant to Rule 1 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Case No. IT-94-2-R61, para. 26, T.Ch.1,20 Oct. 1995.

165 I.L.C. Draft Code, 94, supra. 166 Id, 13.

167 I.L.C. 1991 Report. 266.

168 Kadić. karaazić,70F.3d232(2ndCir. I99S),cert, denied, 64 U.S.L.W.3832(18 Jun. 1996).

169 R. v.Finta, [1994) 1 R.C.S., 701.

170 Id.

171 Casee No 38, Annual Digest and Reports of Public International Law Cases for the Year 1947, 100-101 (Butterworth & Co., London 1951).

172 See; e.g.. Vol. I Entscheidungcn des Obersten Gerichtshofes Für Die Britische Zone in Soafsachen, case 2,6 10; case 4,19-25; case 23,91-95; case 25,105-110; case31,122-126; case 34,141-143.

173 Id at case 16,60-62.

174 OGHBZ, Decision of the District Court (Landgericht) Hamburg of 11 Nov. 1948. STS 78/48. Justiz and NS-Verbrechen II, 1945-1966.491.499 (unofficial translation).

175 Report of the Secretary-General, para. 54.

176 para. 34.

177 See Georg Schwarzenberger, The Law of Armed Conflict 462-66.

178 War Crimes Commission, 9, supra.

179 Id, 33-34.

180 Id. 38 (citing Report of the Commission on Responsibilities).

181 Id. 43-44 idling Treaty of Versailles Art. 229).

182 Nürnberg Charier, supra.

183 Control Council Law No. 10. supra.

184 Nürnberg Judgment. 52, supra.

185 Id, 26.

186 I.L.C Draft Code. 19, supra. See also Brownlie, Principles of Public International Law (4th ed. 1990) 562; Dimtein, International Criminal lav, 20 Israel L. Rev. 206 (1985); Oppenheim, International Law (8th ed. 1993); ROIing. Criminal Responsibility/or Violations of the Laws of War, 12 Belgian Rev. Int'l L. 8-26 (1976) (all in agreement that the principles of the Nümberg Charter now form a part of the body of international law).

187 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, U.N.G-A. resolution 39/46 (10 Dec. 1984).

188 Convention on Apartheid, supra.

189 Trial of Wagner and Six Others. Vol. III Law Reports 24,40-42,94-95.

190 Trial of Martin Gottfried Weiss and 39 Others Vol. XI Law Reports 5.

191 Vol. XI Law Reports 97-98; Vol. XV Law Reports 89; Vol. I Law Reports 43.

192 Vol. XI Law Reports 15.

193 Trial of Werner Rohde and Eight Others. Vol XV Law Reports 51.

194 (Justice case“), Vol VI Law Reports 88.

195 United States of America v. Wilhelm List, et at. 1948.

196 Vol. XI Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 1 [26], supra.

197 Vol. XI Law Reports 15.

198 Id.

199 Vol. VI Law Reports 84,87.

200 Trial of the German Major War Criminals: Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal sitting at Nuremberg Germany. Part 22 at 493 (London: His Majesty's Stationery Office 1950).

201 Trial of Franz Schonfeld and Nine Others, Vol. XI Law Reports 69-70.

202 Id., 72.

203 See Trial of Karl Adam Golkel and 13 Others. British Military Court Wuppertal, Germany, 15-21 May 1946, Judge-Advocate's Summation, Vol. V Law Reports 53 (“it is quite clear that [concerned in the killing does] not mean that a man actually had to be present at the site of the shooting.“), 45-47, 54-55 (defendants who only drove victims to woods to be killed there were found to have been “concerned in the killing“); Trial of Max Wielen and 17 Others (British Military Court, Hamburg, Germany I Jul. 3 Sep. 1947 (not necessary that a person be present to be “concerned in a killing“) Vol. XI Law Reports 43-44,46.

204 Trial of Burn Tesch and Two Others, (Zyklon B case) Vol. I Law Reports 93.

205 Id. 94.

206 Id.101.

207 Vol. VII Law Reports 49 and fn 1.

208 1. Paust, My Lai and Vietnam, 57 Mil U Rev. 99,168 (1972).

209 Vol. XI Law Reports 13.

210 Id. 8,12

211 Id

212 Id.,15

213 Vol. II War Crimes Reports 418.

214 Id. 419.

215 Trial of Otto Sandrock and Three Others Vol. I Law Reports 35.43 (1947

216 Id.43.

217 Case. no. 12-489, United States v. Kurt Goebell et al, Report, Survey of the Trials of War Crimes Held at Dachau.Germany, 2-3 (IS Sept 1948).

218 Gustav Becker, Wilhelm Weber and 18 Others, Vol. VII Law Reports 67,70.

219 ,Id 71.

220 Id

221 I.L.C. Draft Code Art 2(3)(a) & (d) (emphasis added).

222 Id., 24 (emphasis in original

223 I.L.C. Draft Code; 24 (emphasis in original).

224 See Bassiouni, 318, supra.

225 Henri Meyrowitz, 250, supra. 226.See Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, The Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status (1992); see also Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law 66-68 (Clarendon Press: Oxford, 2nd. ed. 1996).

227 Bassiouni, 317, supra.

228 Report of Counsellor Le Gunehcc, 24, quoted in Cassese, Violence and Law in the Modern Age, 112, supra.

229 id.

230 See Id.,110.

231 See. e.g ., the Barbie case, 143, supra.

232 I.L.C. Draft Cede, 98, supra.

233 Id.,99.

234 Report of the Ad Hoc Committee, 17, supra.

235 Nümberg Principles, para. 120, supra

236 Nümberg Judgment, 247-253, supra.

237 Attorney General of Israel v. Eichmann, 36 International Law Reports 5.239 (1968).

238 Justice case, Vol. VI Law Reports, 39, supra (emphasis added).

239 Notes on the Justice case. Id., 79.

240 Nümberg Judgment, 237, supra.

241 See Vol. XV Law Reports 135.

242 Vol. V Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, 9S4, supra.

243 Id., 997,998.

244 .Id., 999,1001.

245 Id.,1010,1015.

246 See also Telford Taylor, Final Report to the Secretary of the Army on the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials Under Control Council Law No. 10, 64-65(1949).

247 Quinn.v. Robinson. 783 F.2d 776,799-801 (9th Cir. 1986).

248 Eichmann case, 277-278,287-289, supra.

249 Barbie case, supra.

250 I.L.C. 1991 Report, 236. supra.

251 Id , 268.

252 Id , 98.

253 Bassiouni, 282, supra.

254 See Nümberg Judgment, 248-249, supra; the Funk case, id, 305-307 (regarding the role of economic discrimination as persecution); see also United States of America v. Ernst von Weizaecker et at., Vol XIV Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10,676-678, supra.

255 Nümberg Judgment, 247-249, supra.

256 At, 180-181.

257 At. 339-40

258 Id 297-298.

259 Id.,300.

260 Id.,300.

261 Flick Trial, 27,supra.

262 Id.,26.

263 Notes on the Flick Trial, id., 50.

264 British Command Paper, Cmd. 6964,85, quoted In Notes on the Flick Trial, S1, supra.

265 See, e.g., the Nümberg Tribunal's statements in the Leadership Corps of the Nazi Party case, Nümberg Judgment, supra at 2S9; the Seyss-Inquart case, id., 328, 329; the Funk case, id., 30S; the Frick case, id., 300; and the Goering case, id., 282.

266 Eichmann case, supra.

267 Nazi and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 5710/1950.

268 Summary of Eichmann case, id. at 14.

269 Nümberg Judgment, 302,supra.

270 Id., 304.

271 Justice case, supra, I; see also id, 51-52 (United States Military Tribunal applying Control Council Law No.10 explained that there were four types of laws the enforcement of which it would not normally regard as being illegal).

272 Id 52.

273 Notes on Judgment, 81,83, supra.

274 Id ., para. 56, referencing T/1403.

275 ,Id paras. 56,57.

276 Genocide Convention, supra.

277 I.L.C. Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, Ybk 1LC. 1954, Vol. H, 150-152, U.N. Doc. A/2673.

278 See, eg., the Genocide Convention. Art. 11,supra: the Nuernberg Charter, Art. 6(c), supra: the Tokyo Charter, Art. 5(c), supra: Control Council Law No. 10, Art. 2(c). supra; the 1996 I.L.C. Draft Code. An. I8(e). supra and the Nümberg Principles, Principle IV.c, supra.

279 Report of the Secretary-General, para. 47,supra.

280 J.H. Burger, H. Danelius, The United Nations Convention Against Torture, 122.

281 I.L.C. Draft Code, 103, supra.

282 See Trial of Max Schmid. Vol. XIII Law Reports, 151-152 and notes thereto, supra.

1 Opinion and Judgment para. 587.

2 Id para. 588.

3 ICJ Reports. 1986 p. 14.

4 Opinion and Judgment para. 588.

5 Id.

6 Id. para. 595.

7 Id para. 585.

8 Decision on the Defence Motion for Interlocutory Appeal on Jurisdiction, Prosecutor v. Tadić. case no. 1T-94-1, A.C., 2 Oct. 1995 (“Appeals Chamber Decision“) paras. 72.70.

9 Opinion and Judgment para. 569.

10 Id.

11 See id. paras. 586. 595.

12 Appeals Chamber Decision para. 70. supra.

13 Opinion and Judgment para. 597.

14 Id. para. 606.

15 See id para. 598.

16 See id. para. 604

17 Id para. 586.

18 Id. para. 584.

19 Nicaragua para. 109, supra.

20 Opinion and Judgment para. 588.

21 Id.,para.587.

22 Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in time of War (1942) Vol. 75 U.N.T.S. 973.

23 Jean Pictet (gen. ed.). Commentary, Geneva Convention Retains to the Protection of Civilian Persons in rune of War. Convention IV (1CRC, Geneva 1958) (“Commentary to Geneva Convention IV) p. 60

24 Nicaragua paras. 106,103, supra.

25 Id para. 110.

26 Id. para. 113.

27 Id para. 115.

28 Id, Sep. Op. Judge Ago para. 16 (emphasis added), supra.

29 See Opinion and Judgment para. 584.

30 Id para. 585.

31 See Nicaragua para. 219, supra.

32 Id. para. 106.

33 Opinion and Judgment para. 604.

34 Commentary to Geneva Convention IV p. 212, supra.