War crime

A war crime is a violation of the

The formal concept of war crimes emerged from the codification of the customary international law that applied to warfare between sovereign states, such as the Lieber Code (1863) of the Union Army in the American Civil War and the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 for international war.^[1] In the aftermath of the Second World War, the war-crime trials of the leaders of the Axis powers established the Nuremberg principles of law, such as that international criminal law defines what is a war crime. In 1949, the Geneva Conventions legally defined new war crimes and established that states could exercise universal jurisdiction over war criminals.^[1] In the late 20th century and early 21st century, international courts extrapolated and defined additional categories of war crimes applicable to a civil war.^[1]

History

Early examples

In 1474, the first trial for a war crime was that of Peter von Hagenbach, realised by an ad hoc tribunal of the Holy Roman Empire, for his command responsibility for the actions of his soldiers, because "he, as a knight, was deemed to have a duty to prevent" criminal behaviour by a military force. Despite having argued that he had obeyed superior orders, von Hagenbach was convicted, condemned to death, and beheaded.^[2][3]

Hague Conventions

The Hague Conventions were international treaties negotiated at the First and Second Peace Conferences at

The Lieber Code was written early in the

The Geneva Conventions are four related treaties adopted and continuously expanded from 1864 to 1949 that represent a legal basis and framework for the conduct of war under international law. Every single member state of the United Nations has currently ratified the conventions, which are universally accepted as customary international law, applicable to every situation of armed conflict in the world. The Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions adopted in 1977 containing the most pertinent, detailed and comprehensive protections of international humanitarian law for persons and objects in modern warfare are still not ratified by several states continuously engaged in armed conflicts, namely the United States, Israel, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran, and others. Accordingly, states retain different codes and values about wartime conduct. Some signatories have routinely violated the Geneva Conventions in a way that either uses the ambiguities of law or political maneuvering to sidestep the laws' formalities and principles.

The first three conventions have been revised and expanded, with the fourth one added in 1949:

• The
  1929 version, and later the First Geneva Convention of 1949.^[6]
• The Second Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea was adopted in 1906^[7] and then significantly revised and replaced by the Second Geneva Convention of 1949.
• The
  was adopted in 1929
  and then significantly revised and replaced by the Third Geneva Convention of 1949.
• The
  Hague Convention IV
  .

• Protocol I (1977) relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts.
• Protocol II (1977) relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts.
• Protocol III (2005) relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem.

Leipzig trials

Just after WWI, world governments started to try and systematically create a code for how war crimes would be defined. Their first outline of a law was "Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field"—also known as the "Lieber Code."

London Charter/Nuremberg trials 1945

Also known as the Tokyo Trial, the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal or simply as the Tribunal, it was convened on May 3, 1946, to try the leaders of the Empire of Japan for three types of crimes: "Class A" (crimes against peace), "Class B" (war crimes), and "Class C" (crimes against humanity), committed during World War II.

Formation of the International Criminal Court

On July 1, 2002, the International Criminal Court (ICC), a treaty-based court located in The Hague, came into being for the prosecution of war crimes committed on or after that date. Several nations, most notably the United States, China, Russia, and Israel, have criticized the court. The United States still participates as an observer. Article 12 of the Rome Statute provides jurisdiction over the citizens of non-contracting states if they are accused of committing crimes in the territory of one of the state parties.^[10]

The ICC only has jurisdiction over these crimes when they are "part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes".^[11]

Prominent indictees

Heads of state and government

To date, the present and former

• illegal abduction of children from Ukraine and deportation into Russia during the Russian invasion of Ukraine.^[12]
• German
  Hideki Tōjō and Kuniaki Koiso
  in the aftermath of World War II.
• Former
  Serbian President Slobodan Milošević was brought to trial charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in three republics. This pertained to superior responsibility for the Bosnia and Croatia indictments, and individual responsibility for the Kosovo indictment. He was acquitted as he died in custody in 2006, before the trial ended.^[13]
• Former
  Charles G. Taylor was also brought to The Hague charged with war crimes; his trial stretched from 2007 to March 2011. He was convicted in April 2012 of aiding and abetting crimes against humanity.^[14][15]
• Former Bosnian Serb President Radovan Karadžić was arrested in Belgrade on July 18, 2008, and brought before Belgrade's War Crimes Court a few days later. He was extradited to the Netherlands, and is currently in The Hague, in the custody of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The trial began in 2010. On March 24, 2016, he was found guilty of genocide in Srebrenica, war crimes and crimes against humanity, 10 of the 11 charges in total, and sentenced to 40 years' imprisonment.^[16][17] He was sentenced to life on appeal.^[18]
• Omar al-Bashir, former head of state of Sudan, is charged with three counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and other war crimes regarding the war in the Darfur region of Sudan.^[19][20]
• Former
  2011 Libyan civil war, and was killed in October 2011 before he could stand trial.^{[citation needed}
  ]
• Former Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori was charged with several counts of human rights violations committed by his government and affiliated death squads during his regime.^{[21][22][23][24][25]}

Other

• Yoshijirō Umezu, general of the Imperial Japanese Army
• Iwane Matsui, general of the Imperial Japanese Army who was known for his involvement in the Nanjing Massacre
• War minister of the Empire of Japan
• Hermann Göring, Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe.
• SS
  .
• Wilhelm Keitel, Generalfeldmarschall, head of the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht.
• Großadmiral, Commander in Chief of the Kriegsmarine
  .
• Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments and War Production in Nazi Germany 1942–45.
• Mỹ Lai massacre
  .
• Indo-Pakistani War of 1971.^[26]
• First Gulf War
• Ratko Mladić, indicted for genocide amongst other violations of humanitarian law during the Bosnian War; he was captured in Serbia in May 2011 and was extradited to face trial in The Hague, wherein he was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.^[27]
• Joseph Kony, leader of the Lord's Resistance Army, guerrilla group which used to operate in Uganda.

Definition

War crimes are serious violations of the rules of customary and treaty law concerning international humanitarian law, criminal offenses for which there is individual responsibility.^[28]

Colloquial definitions of war crime include violations of established protections of the laws of war, but also include failures to adhere to norms of procedure and rules of battle, such as attacking those displaying a peaceful

1. Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:

   1. Willful killing
   2. Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments
   3. Willfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health
   4. Extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly
   5. Compelling a prisoner of war or other protected person to serve in the forces of a hostile Power
   6. Willfully depriving a prisoner of war or other protected person of the rights of fair and regular trial
   7. Unlawful deportation or transfer or unlawful confinement
   8. Taking of hostages

2. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law...
3. In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949...[a]
4. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law...^[b]

Legality of civilian casualties

Under the

For example, conducting an operation on an ammunition depot or a terrorist training camp would not be prohibited because a farmer is plowing a field in the area; the farmer is not the object of attack and the operations would adhere to proportionality and military necessity. On the other hand, an extraordinary military advantage would be necessary to justify an operation posing risks of collateral death or injury to thousands of civilians. In "grayer" cases the legal question of whether the expected incidental harm is excessive may be very subjective. For this reason, States have chosen to apply a "clearly excessive" standard for determining whether a criminal violation has occurred.[53]

When there is no justification for military action, such as civilians being made the object of attack, a proportionality analysis is unnecessary to conclude that the attack is unlawful.

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia

For aerial strikes, pilots generally have to rely on information supplied by external sources (headquarters, ground troops) that a specific position is in fact a military target. In the case of former Yugoslavia, NATO pilots hit a civilian object (the Chinese embassy in Belgrade) that was of no military significance, but the pilots had no idea of determining it aside from their orders. The committee ruled that "the aircrew involved in the attack should not be assigned any responsibility for the fact they were given the wrong target and that it is inappropriate to attempt to assign criminal responsibility for the incident to senior leaders because they were provided with wrong information by officials of another agency".^[54] The report also notes that "Much of the material submitted to the OTP consisted of reports that civilians had been killed, often inviting the conclusion to be drawn that crimes had therefore been committed. Collateral casualties to civilians and collateral damage to civilian objects can occur for a variety of reasons."^[54]

Rendulic Rule

The Rendulic Rule is a standard by which commanders are judged.

German General

Under the "Rendulic Rule" persons must assess the military necessity of an action based on the information available to them at that time; they cannot be judged based on information that subsequently comes to light.^[53]

See also

Country listings

Legal issues

Miscellaneous

References

Further reading

Library resources about
War crime

---

• Resources in your library
• Resources in other libraries

• Cryer, Robert (2007). An introduction to international criminal law and procedure. Cambridge University Press.
  ISBN 978-0-521-87609-4
  .
• Dinstein, Yôrām (2004). The conduct of hostilities under the law of international armed conflict. Cambridge University Press.
  ISBN 978-0-521-54227-2
  . Retrieved November 14, 2010.
• Hagopian, Patrick (2013). American Immunity: War Crimes and the Limits of International Law. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.
• Horvitz, Leslie Alan; Catherwood, Christopher (2011). Encyclopedia of War Crimes & Genocide (Hardcover). Vol. 2 (Revised ed.). New York: Facts on File.
  ISBN 0-8160-8083-6
• Shaw, Malcolm N. (November 24, 2008). International law. Cambridge University Press.
  ISBN 978-0-521-72814-0
  . Retrieved November 14, 2010.
• Solis, Gary D. (2010). The Law of Armed Conflict: International Humanitarian Law in War. Cambridge University Press.
  ISBN 978-0-521-87088-7
  . Retrieved November 14, 2010.

External links

Wikimedia Commons has media related to War crimes.

Wikiquote has quotations related to War crime.

Look up war crime in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• Australian Bunker And Military Museum - abmm.org Archived March 30, 2022, at the Wayback Machine
• "Amnesty International". Amnesty International. Retrieved July 29, 2015.
• "International criminal jurisdiction". International Committee of the Red Cross. October 3, 2013.
• "Cambodia Tribunal Monitor". Northwestern University School of Law Center for International Human Rights and Documentation Center of Cambodia. Retrieved December 17, 2008.
• Burns, John (January 30, 2008). "Quarter, Giving No". Crimes of War Project. Archived from the original on December 31, 2008. Retrieved December 17, 2008.
• Human Rights First; Command's Responsibility: Detainee Deaths in U.S. Custody in Iraq and Afghanistan
• TheRule of Law in Armed Conflicts Project
• Iraqi Special Tribunal
• Crimes of War Project
• Rome Treaty of the International Criminal Court
• Special Court for Sierra Leone
• Ad-Hoc Court for East Timor
• CBC Digital Archives -Fleeing Justice: War Criminals in Canada
• A Criminological Analysis of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq By Ronald C. Kramer and Raymond J. Michalowski
• Investigating Human Rights – Reaching Out to Diaspora Communities in U.S. for War Crimes Tips (
  FBI
  )
• UK's Geneva Conventions (Amendment) Act 1995 – which bans war crimes