Chairman of the Commission : Mr. Boris Shikhmuradov, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan
Co-Chairmen : Mr. Christopher Lamb, Ambassador of Australia; Mr. Teofilo Siman, President of the Salvadorean Red Cross Society
Rapporteur : Mr. Tom Buruku, Chairman of the the Uganda Red Cross Society


General considerations

Several delegations deplored the widespread violations of international humanitarian law being committed today and provided many examples, such as ethnic cleansing, the deliberate targeting or massacre of civilians, rape, forced displacements, hostage taking and the recruitment of children as combatants.

The universality of the Geneva Conventions and the importance of all international humanitarian law treaties were unanimously recognized. Some delegations stressed that there was no need for new rules or new commitments since most problems stemmed from lack of respect for and lack of implementation of existing rules. Violations of humanitarian law prolonged and worsened conflicts and should not be tolerated. One delegation pointed out that continuous violations and lack of enforcement challenged the credibility of the law.

Several delegations expressed satisfaction with the new structure of the Conference, which encouraged concrete action and ensured follow-up. Many stressed the urgent need to help conflict victims and actively promote and defend humanitarian values. Most delegations expressed general support for the draft Plan of Action and welcomed the fact that the Conference had led to increased dialogue and partnership between States and the components of the Movement.


Preventing conflicts and promoting a culture of peace

A considerable number of delegations pointed out that armed conflicts could be prevented and stressed that it was vital to address the causes of conflict situations, which were often rooted in poverty, in order to contain or defuse them. In any case, every effort must be made to settle disputes peacefully. Many delegations mentioned the need to strive for a sustainable and more balanced development, to eradicate poverty and to assist the most vulnerable sectors of the population, especially in volatile areas.

One government delegation stressed that the United Nations Security Council was the main organ responsible for maintaining international peace and security and that it should be enabled to fully assume its responsibilities under the UN Charter. Another delegation cautioned that the problem of restoring peace had to be addressed as well: conflicts should not be "frozen" or forgotten.

Several speakers urged that the Movement become more actively involved in the prevention of ethnic, racial, religious and political conflicts and in peace advocacy.

Many delegations also highlighted the importance of fighting the culture of violence, which was a problem throughout the world, and of developing the human reflex to say "no" to violence. They stressed the need to promote a culture of peace, understanding, tolerance, friendship and dialogue among nations, cultures and civilizations, and to educate people in humanitarian values and behaviour. Some delegations raised the problem of the manipulation of information by the media and of incitement to hatred and violence. One National Society proposed that the curriculum of training in international humanitarian law should be revised, taking into consideration the psychology of human beings when they carried weapons.

Two government delegations said that it would be important to determine the fundamental standards of humanity which reflected both human rights law and international humanitarian law and which applied to all parties in all situations of violence.


Implementation measures in peacetime

Many delegations reported that their governments had already ratified various international humanitarian law treaties, or were considering doing so, among others Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (one delegation), the Ottawa treaty, the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and its Protocol II, the 1980 Weapons Convention and its Protocols II and IV and the Statute of the International Criminal Court. Some delegations also reported that their governments were considering withdrawing reservations.

A considerable number of delegations enumerated the laws and implementation measures that their governments had enacted or were in the process of enacting to bring national legislation in line with their international obligations (prosecution of war crimes, protection of the emblem, list of protected cultural properties, etc.). The important role played by National Societies and the valuable contribution of the ICRC Advisory Service in this regard were commended. Many delegations added that national interministeriel commissions had been set up to deal with these matters in a coordinated way. Some delegations proposed the a system be set up for the voluntary sharing of information on the national implementation of international humanitarian law. One delegation reported that its government was having the Geneva Conventions translated into the national language.


Dissemination

Many speakers stressed the paramount importance of disseminating the rules and principles of international humanitarian law. Some mentioned the need to integrate the law into the training provided for military and security forces and into command procedures, staff exercises and military manoeuvres. One delegation proposed that training in humanitarian law should be given to religious personnel attached to the armed forces.

Many delegations stressed the importance of organizing dissemination programmes for civil servants and the public at large, in cooperation with relevant organizations and educational institutions. One government delegation committed itself to organizing special training in humanitarian law for its magistrates.

The crucial role played by National Societies in disseminating humanitarian law was largely recognized, and several National Society delegations briefly described the programmes which were being implemented. Some expressed their gratitude to the ICRC for its contribution to their national dissemination programmes.


Enhanced respect for international humanitarian law in wartime

Serious concerns about lack of respect for basic principles of humanitarian law were expressed by a considerable number of delegates, many of whom stressed the need to ensure special protection for women and vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, people with disabilities and displaced persons. Some delegations pointed out that civilians should never be targeted and that it was prohibited to deliberately destroy a country's economy as a method of warfare. One delegation expressed the wish that greater emphasis be placed in the Plan of Action on respect for humanitarian law in non-international armed conflicts, which were the most common ones today and which inflicted great suffering.

A large number of delegations stressed that all belligerents, whatever their status and their reasons for being involved in an armed conflict, had to respect and ensure respect for international humanitarian law. This concerned not only States, but also non-State players, armed groups and supranational forces such as those under the command of the UN or regional organizations.

Emphasizing the right of conflict victims to protection, assistance and relief, many delegations pointed out that it was essential to ensure that impartial humanitarian organizations had rapid access to these victims and to facilitate their work according to their respective mandates. A number of delegations expressed their gratitude to the ICRC for its valuable help in protecting and assisting the population of their war-torn countries.

Some delegations pointed out that States not involved in armed conflicts must ensure respect for international humanitarian law and try to influence the behaviour of the belligerents. It was stressed that force may not be used on humanitarian grounds except as a last resort and that this was to be contemplated only in extreme circumstances and if it was in the best interest of the victims. Moreover, the use of force on humanitarian grounds must always be in conformity with the UN Charter.

In this regard, many government delegations warned that humanitarian concerns should not be selective or based on double standards and that they should never be used as a pretext to forward strategic, military or economic interests or to justify interference in the internal affairs of other States. These delegations stressed the need to respect State sovereignty and independence, in accordance with the UN Charter.


International Fact-Finding Commission (Art. 90 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions)

Some delegations stated that their governments had recognized the competence of the International Fact-Finding Commission. The President of the IFFC called on other governments to do likewise and on all States to make use of this body. He gave a brief report on the Commission's activities and on proposals to create a mechanism allowing it to receive individual complaints (along the lines of the Human Rights Committee established under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights).


Putting an end to impunity

Many speeches focused on the need to ensure accountability for violations of international humanitarian law. A considerable number welcomed the encouraging steps recently taken to put an end to impunity, in particular the adoption of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, the ongoing work of the two ad hoc International Tribunals and national prosecutions, all of which had an important deterrent and preventive effect. A number of government delegations announced plans to ratify the Statute of the International Criminal Court and called on other States to ratify it as well. One government delegation stressed that State sovereignty should not be used as a shield behind which gross violations of human rights and international humanitarian law could be carried out with impunity.

Several delegations mentioned the efforts that had been made in their countries to set up, through national criminal laws and proceedings, appropriate frameworks in which domestic courts could punish war crimes, whatever the nationality of the victim or offender and wherever the crime had been committed. They also mentioned the steps which their governments were taking to facilitate cooperation with international tribunals, and, in some cases, the practical and financial support which their countries were giving to these courts (forensic experts for investigations, for example). One National Society emphasized the need to promote greater awareness of the security and access problems that could be faced by the Movement as a whole if a member of one of the Movement's components testified against presumed war criminals in an international court.

A few delegations stressed the importance of establishing the truth about past violations so as to prepare the ground for reconciliation and facilitate the healing process. Some delegations mentioned the need to address the question of compensation for the victims of violations.


Specific humanitarian problems

A large number of government and National Society delegations expressed their deep concern about the tragic situation and sufferings of children caught up in armed conflicts or other situations of violence. They stressed the need to ensure that their specific needs for protection and assistance were met.

Many speakers urged that measures be taken to stop the participation of children in armed hostilities and their recruitment into armed forces or into armed groups in violation of international law. They repeated that it was urgent to raise to 18 the age of recruitment and of participation in armed hostilities, as already called for by the 26th International Conference, and renewed their support for the promotion and adoption of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Several delegations deplored the traumatic experiences that would affect children forever, adding that the need for psycho-social support and for rehabilitation programmes could not be overemphasized. One delegation mentioned that such programmes should not be limited to war-torn areas but that they were also needed in countries where these children found asylum.

A number of delegations pointed out that special attention had to be given to specific problems that women faced in armed conflicts. One delegation deplored that this issue had not been more fully developed in the draft Plan of Action but expressed its readiness to wait for the set of guidelines that the ICRC would draw up with a view to better addressing the protection and assistance needs of women affected by armed conflict.

Some government delegations called attention to the situation of prisoners of war. These prisoners must be protected and treated humanely, and placed under the continuous supervision of an international body such as the ICRC in accordance with the relevant provisions of international humanitarian law. The issue of prisoners who should have been released a long time ago, at the close of the hostilities, but were still being held should be addressed without delay. Some delegations raised the question of people unaccounted for and called for greater readiness to clarify their fate and inform their families.


Weapons and other means of warfare

The proliferation and uncontrolled transfer of weapons, mainly light weapons, was of general concern, as it had proved to be an important source of violations and civilian casualties, even after the end of hostilities. Many delegations stressed the need to actively address this issue. Some highlighted the close link between the tragedy of child soldiers and the availability of large quantities of light weapons which could be easily handled by children. A number of delegations pointed out that responsibility also lay with States that produced and sold these weapons, and some said that the 1997 Inter-American Convention Against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives and Other Related Materials should serve as an example. Others mentioned the need for mechanisms to restrict the availability of weapons (one delegation proposed that weapons be labelled), to control their transfer and to prevent their use by belligerents who did not comply with international humanitarian law. Various government delegations suggested that the possibility of collecting and destroying existing weapons be considered.

Some delegations raised the issue of weapons that caused unnecessary suffering or had indiscriminate effects and that were illegal under international humanitarian law. In this respect, particular concern was expressed about the use of biological and chemical weapons. One National Society delegation mentioned the product "agent orange", which continued to cause injuries such as genetic malformations for generations after the end of a conflict, and called for international support for a campaign launched by the Federation to alleviate the suffering produced by this weapon. One government delegation also stressed the need to fight against the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

The ICRC said that it would be useful to adopt common criteria to help determine which weapons already in use or still at the planning stage could cause unnecessary suffering and should therefore be prohibited.

The ongoing tragedy caused by mines, mainly antipersonnel mines, was raised by numerous delegations. It was pointed out that mines continued to kill long after the end of a conflict and that they impeded reconstruction and economic recovery. Several delegations said that their governments had ratified or were in the process of ratifying the Ottawa treaty. Many urged that this treaty be ratified by all States without further delay. The problem of landmines was also raised by many delegations, some of which mentioned plans by their governments to ratify amended Protocol II to the 1980 Convention.

Concerning the huge problem of already existing mines, some delegations stressed the importance of destroying stockpiles and of allocating sufficient resources for clearing mines, setting up mine-awareness programmes and assisting mine victims. In this regard, those who had placed mines bore a special responsibility. One delegation mentioned the need to build indigenous capacities for managing mine-action programmes.


Emblem

Only a few delegations raised questions related to the emblem. One expressed the wish that pending issues regarding the emblem should be resolved quickly. Others replied that this had to be done in a way that suited all the components of the Movement. Some delegates observed that the red cross and red crescent were above all symbols of humanity and of relief for those who were suffering.