Practice Relating to Rule 113. Treatment of the Dead
Section A. Respect for the dead
Geneva Convention IV
Article 16, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “As far as military considerations allow, each Party to the conflict shall facilitate the steps taken … to protect [the killed] against … ill-treatment.”
Additional Protocol I
Article 34(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides: “The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities … shall be respected”.
Additional Protocol II
Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
1. All persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities, whether or not their liberty has been restricted, are entitled to respect for their person [and] honour …
2. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, the following acts against the persons referred to in paragraph I are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:
(e) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment …
ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
Back to top
Oxford Manual
Article 19 of the 1880 Oxford Manual provides: “It is forbidden to … mutilate the dead lying on the field of battle.”
Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
Article 3(a) of the 1990 Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam provides: “In the event of the use of force and in case of armed conflict … it is prohibited to mutilate dead bodies.”
Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “desecration of the remains of those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … [to prevent] mutilation [the dead].”
ICC Elements of Crimes
With reference to the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, the 2000 ICC Elements of Crimes specifies that Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute also applies to dead persons.
UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii), “[c]ommitting outrages upon personal dignity” constitutes a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
Back to top
Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides:
The remains of the dead, regardless of whether they are combatants, noncombatants, protected persons or civilians, are to be respected, in particular their honour, family rights, religious convictions and practices and manners and customs. At all times they shall be humanely treated.
Australia
Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
The remains of the dead, regardless of whether they are combatants, non-combatants, protected persons or civilians are to be respected, in particular their honour, family rights, religious convictions and practices and manners and customs. At all times they shall be humanely treated.
The LOAC Manual (2006) replaces both the Defence Force Manual (1994) and the Commanders’ Guide (1994).
Bosnia and Herzegovina
The Instructions to the Muslim Fighter (1993) issued by the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ABiH) in 1993 stated:
(c) Prisoners of war:
… Islam likewise forbids the mutilation of enemy … dead … These are general rules which are binding for our soldiers. However, if the commanding officer assesses that the situation and the general interest demand a different course of action, then the soldiers are duty-bound to obey their commanding officer.
Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides: “The remains of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities or while in occupation or detention in relation thereto shall be respected.”
The manual considers that “mutilation or other maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime.
Canada
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides that “there is … an obligation to … protect and pay proper respect for the dead”.
Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked: “The remains of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities or while in occupation or detention in relation thereto shall be respected, and their gravesites properly respected, maintained and marked.”
In its chapter on the treatment of civilians in the hands of a party to the conflict or an occupying power, the manual states:
As far as military considerations permit, the belligerents must facilitate any steps to search for killed and wounded, to assist shipwrecked and other persons exposed to grave danger, and to protect them against pillage and ill-treatment.
In its chapter on “War crimes, individual criminal liability and command responsibility”, the manual further states that “mutilation or other maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime.
In its chapter on non-international armed conflicts, the manual states:
After any engagement and whenever circumstances permit, all possible steps must be taken without delay to search for and collect the wounded, sick and shipwrecked … Steps must also be taken to search for the dead [and] prevent their despoliation.
Canada
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) states that there is “an obligation to … protect and pay proper respect for the dead”.
Ecuador
Ecuador’s Naval Manual (1989) provides that “mutilation and other mistreatment of the dead” are representative war crimes.
Greece
The Hellenic Territorial Army’s Internal Service Code (1984), as amended, provides: “It is forbidden for members of the armed forces: … To perform outrageous acts against the dead.”
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) states: “It is imperative to tend to the enemy’s wounded and dead.”
The manual further states: “[A legal] combatant is entitled to the status of a prisoner of war, according him … protection against the abuse of dead soldiers’ bodies.”
According to the manual, it is absolutely forbidden to abuse the corpses of the enemy’s dead.
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states: “The bodies of the fallen must not be desecrated and they must be given suitable burial.”
The manual further states:
It is absolutely forbidden to desecrate the bodies of the enemy’s fallen. Such actions do not contribute anything to the fighting and destroy the human image of both the fallen soldier and the desecrator.
The Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) is a second edition of the Manual on the Laws of War (1998).
Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands states: “Remains must be protected.”
Netherlands
The Military Handbook (19959 of the Netherlands provides: “The dead must not be mutilated.”
Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states:
The individual is entitled to respect for his life, physical, mental and moral integrity and whatever is inseparable from his personality.
Examples:
- The physical remains of a fallen combatant are inviolable.
New Zealand
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) states: “The remains of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities, or while in occupation or detention in relation to hostilities, shall be respected.”
The manual also states: “Among other war crimes recognised by the customary law of armed conflict are mutilation or other maltreatment of dead bodies.”
With respect to non-international armed conflicts, the manual states that “steps must be taken to prevent … abuse” of the dead.
Nigeria
According to Nigeria’s Manual on the Laws of War, “maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime.
Philippines
The Military Instructions (1989) of the Philippines states:
Respect for the dead which includes our own troops, the enemy and particularly innocent civilians must be a paramount concern of all commanders and troops at all levels … All dead bodies … must be handled humanely and treated with care and respect.
Republic of Korea
The Republic of Korea’s Operational Law Manual (1996) states that the mutilation of dead bodies is a war crime.
Republic of Korea
Under the Republic of Korea’s military regulations, “injuring dead bodies” is a war crime.
Sierra Leone
Sierra Leone’s Instructor Manual (2007) states:
i. Mutilation of bodies is prohibited.
j. The above mentioned actions shall be applied to all dead persons, whether civilian or military, own or enemy forces.
South Africa
According to South Africa’s LOAC Manual (1996), “maltreatment of dead bodies” is a grave breach.
South Africa
South Africa’s Revised Civic Education Manual (2004) provides that the “[m]altreatment of dead bodies” is a grave breach of the law of armed conflict and a war crime.
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) states: “The dead shall be preserved from attack.” It also states: “The dead shall be respected.”
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) states that anyone who “mutilates the dead” will be punished.
Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
“The dead” means persons who died because of the reasons related to the conduct of hostilities. The remains of such persons, including non-citizens of the State where they died, shall be respected.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) states: “The dead must be protected against … maltreatment.”
The manual further states that “maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Pamphlet (1981) states: “The dead must not be … mutilated.”
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Manual (2004) provides that the dead must be protected against maltreatment and that the mutilation of dead bodies is a war crime. The manual refers to this as a “well-established rule of customary international law”.
In its chapter on internal armed conflict, the manual states: “The dead must not be … ill-treated.”
United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) provides that “maltreatment of dead bodies” is a war crime.
United States of America
The US Instructor’s Guide (1985) states: “In addition to the grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, the following acts are further examples of war crimes: … mutilating or mistreating dead bodies”.
United States of America
The US Naval Handbook (1995) provides that “mutilation and other mistreatment of the dead” are representative war crimes.
Back to top
Australia
Australia’s War Crimes Act (1945) states: “The expression ‘war crime’ includes the following: … cannibalism … [and] mutilation of the dead”.
Australia
Australia’s ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act (2002) incorporates in the Criminal Code the war crimes defined in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “outrages upon personal dignity” of the bodies of dead persons in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime.
Canada
Canada’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act (2000) provides that the war crimes defined in Article 8(2) of the 1998 ICC Statute are “crimes according to customary international law” and, as such, indictable offences under the Act.
Congo
The Congo’s Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act (1998) defines war crimes with reference to the categories of crimes defined in Article 8 of the 1998 ICC Statute.
Denmark
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (1973), as amended in 1978, provides:
Any person who uses war instruments or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or the general rules of international law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. a fine, lenient imprisonment or up to 12 years’ imprisonment].
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (2005) provides:
Any person who deliberately uses war means [“krigsmiddel”] or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or international customary law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. imprisonment up to life imprisonment].
Ethiopia
Under Ethiopia’s Penal Code (1957), it is a punishable offence to “mutilate a dead person”.
Ethiopia’s Criminal Code (2004) states:
Article 275.- Dereliction of Duty Towards the Enemy.
Whoever, in time of war and contrary to public international law and humanitarian conventions:
(b) mutilates a dead person; or
(d) orders one of the above acts,
The Criminal Code of 2004 repealed Ethiopia’s Penal Code of 1957.
Ireland
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended 1998, provides that any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 16 of the Geneva Convention IV, and of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including violations of Article 34(1), are punishable offences.
Italy
Italy’s Law of War Decree (1938), as amended in 1992, provides: “Commanders shall take all necessary measures to ensure respect for the bodies of enemy dead on the battlefield.”
Italy
Italy’s Wartime Military Penal Code (1941) provides that anyone who mutilates or commits outrages upon the body of a soldier fallen on the battlefield is guilty of a punishable offence.
Lithuania
Lithuania’s Criminal Code (1961), as amended in 1998, punishes outrages upon the bodies of the killed out of revenge or for terror purposes.
Morocco
Morocco’s Military Justice Code (1956) states that “[a]ny individual, military or not, who, in the area of operations of a military field unit … despoils a wounded, sick or dead soldier, is punished with imprisonment”.
Netherlands
The Military Criminal Code (1964), as amended in 1990, of the Netherlands provides for the punishment of persons committing violent acts against a dead person.
New Zealand
Under New Zealand’s International Crimes and ICC Act (2000), war crimes include the crimes defined in Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute.
Norway
Norway’s Military Penal Code (1902), as amended in 1981, provides:
Anyone who contravenes or is accessory to the contravention of provisions relating to the protection of persons or property laid down in … the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … [and in] the two additional protocols to these Conventions … is liable to imprisonment.
Spain
Spain’s Royal Ordinance for the Armed Forces (1978) provides: “The dead shall be respected.”
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Military Criminal Code (1927), as amended, punishes anyone who mutilates a dead person.
Trinidad and Tobago
Under Trinidad and Tobago’s Draft ICC Act (1999), it is a punishable offence to commit a war crime as defined in Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Under the UK ICC Act (2001), it is a punishable offence to commit a war crime as defined in Article 8(2)(b)(xxi) and (c)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute.
Venezuela
Under Venezuela’s Code of Military Justice (1998), as amended, committing outrages upon the dead is considered a crime against international law.
Back to top
Australia
In 1945, in the Takehiko case, an Australian Military Court sentenced the accused, a Japanese soldier, for “mutilating the dead body of a prisoner of war” and for “cannibalism”.
Australia
In 1946, in the Tisato case, an Australian Military Court found the accused, a Japanese soldier, guilty of “cannibalism”. The prosecution in this case alleged that several prisoners had been killed and that their flesh had been eaten.
Israel
In its judgement in Physicians for Human Rights v. Commander of the IDF Forces in the West Bank in 2002, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated:
Though we are unable to express a position regarding the specific events mentioned in the petition … we see fit to emphasize that our combat forces are required to abide by the rules of humanitarian law regarding the care of the wounded, the ill and bodies of the deceased.
Israel
In its ruling in the Barake case in 2002, dealing with the question of when, how and by whom the mortal remains of Palestinians who died in a battle in Jenin refugee camp should be identified and buried, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated: “Needless to say, the burial will be made in an appropriate and respectful manner, maintaining the respect for the dead. In this matter, no distinction will be made between the bodies of armed combatants and the bodies of civilians.”
United States of America
In 1946, in the Kikuchi and Mahuchi case, a US Military Commission sentenced the accused, who were Japanese soldiers, for “bayoneting and mutilating the dead body of a United States prisoner of war”.
United States of America
In 1946, in the Yochio and Others case, a US Military Commission tried and convicted some of the accused Japanese soldiers for “preventing an honorable burial due to the consumption of parts of the bodies of prisoners of war by the accused during a special meal in the officers’ mess”. The accused were found guilty of these charges.
United States of America
In its judgement in the Schmid case in 1947, the US General Military Court at Dachau found the accused, a German medical officer, guilty of maltreating the body of a deceased US airman in violation of Article 3 of the 1929 Geneva Convention. The accused had severed the head from the body of the airman, had baked it and removed the skin and flesh and had bleached the skull.
Back to top
Azerbaijan
In 1993, the Ministry of the Interior of Azerbaijan ordered that troops “in zones of combat, during military operations … must not desecrate the remains of enemies”.
Colombia
In a case before Colombia’s Council of State in 1994, the Prosecutor stated that failure to treat the bodies of dead combatants and civilians with respect constituted a violation of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.
Indonesia
The Report on the Practice of Indonesia states that it is the practice of Indonesia to care for the dead.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 2003, in reply to a written question in the House of Lords, the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence, wrote: “The Deployed Operating Instructions issued to all United Kingdom military units state that enemy dead are to be treated the same as UK military dead.”
United States of America
In 1987, the Deputy Legal Adviser of the US Department of State affirmed: “We support … the principle that … the remains of the dead be respected and maintained”.
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
In 1991, the Ministry of Defence of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia issued a document entitled “Examples of violations of the rules of international law committed by the so-called armed forces of Slovenia”. This document included the following example: “The attitude towards dead YPA [Yugoslav People’s Army] soldiers has been absolutely uncivilized and without any trace of humanity.”
Back to top
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 2005 on human rights and forensic science, the UN Commission on Human Rights underlined “the importance of dignified handling of human remains, including their proper management and disposal, as well as of respect for the needs of families”.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “The dead may not be attacked.”
ICRC
In a press release issued in 1993 in the context of the conflict in Somalia, the ICRC condemned abuses committed on the remains of dead combatants of the UNOSOM II forces.
Back to top
De Zayas
Investigations following allegations concerning crimes committed against members of the armed forces fighting in Crete during the Second World War found evidence that dead German soldiers had been mutilated:
Some had their genitals mutilated, eyes put out, ears and noses cut off; others had knife wounds in the face, stomach, and back; throats were slit, and hands chopped off. The majority of these mutilations were probably defilement of dead bodies; only in a few cases does the evidence indicate that the victim was maltreated and tortured to death.
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards
The Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights of Åbo Akademi University in Turku/Åbo, Finland in 1990, states: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … to prevent [the dead] being … mutilated.”