ICRC databases on international humanitarian law
Photo
of
Previous photo
Next photo
CLOSE
x
ICRC
Skip navigation
Home
|
What's new
|
Contacts
Language
Select one
Francais
Search
International Committee of the Red Cross
Treaties and States parties to such Treaties
Who we are
Who we are - International Committee of the Red Cross
Mandate and mission
Structure
Finances
Working for the ICRC
The Movement
History
Funds and medals
Contacts
What we do
What we do - ICRC activities on behalf of people affected by war
Visiting detainees
Protecting civilians
Reuniting families
Ensuring economic security
Water and habitat
Health
Cooperation with National Societies
Building respect for IHL
Safeguarding health care
Other activities
Where we work
Where we work - the ICRC worldwide
Africa
Americas
Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Middle East
War & Law
War & Law - the legal basis for our action
Treaties and customary law
Contemporary challenges for IHL
Protected persons
Conduct of hostilities
Weapons
Emblem
IHL in domestic law
International criminal jurisdiction
IHL and other legal regimes
Resource centre
Resource centre - Search
Publications and films
Photos
Maps
International review
Annual report
IHL databases
Library and research services
ICRC Archives
Events
Other sites
Gift shop
Video newsroom
Search
Treaties and Documents
1949 Conventions and Additional Protocols, and their Commentaries
By date
By topic
By State
Historical Treaties and Documents
By date
By topic
By State
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
Commentary -
Protection and care
[p.145] Article 10
-- Protection and care
General remarks
441 The final version of the text of Article 10
that was adopted is close to the first draft.
442 The proposal to add shipwrecked persons to those persons already covered by the article was adopted. On the other hand, the proposal
discussed above with [p.146] regard to Article 8
(' Terminology ') (1) to treat persons who are in a dangerous
situation on land, in a hostile environment, particularly the jungle
or the desert, in the same way as the shipwrecked, was not finally
adopted. Similarly, the proposal to add two paragraphs relating to
the search, accommodation and exchange of the wounded, sick,
shipwrecked and dead, was rejected, as many delegates considered that
these matters were sufficiently provided for in the Conventions.
However, it is worthy of note that they were included in Articles
32-34
, though only to a very limited extent.
443 The question of the consent required from the patient to any surgical intervention was the subject of an amendment which was
discussed, though it was finally dealt with under Article 11
(' Protection of persons '), paragraph 5.
Paragraph 1
444 This paragraph repeats one of the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law applicable in cases of armed conflict.
It was not absolutely necessary to mention this in the context of the
Protocol as, clearly, it is already prominently stated in the
Conventions. (2) The reason for nonetheless repeating the principle
was to clearly emphasize its importance, for almost all the
obligations arising from Part II follow from it and the protection
granted to medical personnel is justified only by reference to this
principle. Thus the repetition of this principle at the beginning of
this Part was indispensable for its harmonious structure,
particularly as the Protocol covers all wounded, sick and shipwrecked
persons, with no distinction between military and civilian persons.
445 In the context of an international armed conflict this paragraph concerns all the wounded, sick and shipwrecked in the sense given to
these terms in the Protocol. (3) Committee II considered that it was
appropriate to add the expression "to whichever Party they belong" to
the text of the 1973 draft in order to emphasize this point. In this
way it is clearly stated that every Party to the conflict must
respect and protect its own wounded, sick and shipwrecked -- which
may seem self-evident, though it is perhaps a useful reminder -- and
above all, that the wounded, sick and shipwrecked of the adverse
Party are entitled to the same treatment. As we well know, this
element of respect and protection of persons in the power of the
enemy is certainly one of the essential characteristics of
international humanitarian law.
446 The concepts of "respect" and "protection" are taken from the Conventions. The first concept was introduced as far back as the 1906
revision, the second at the time of the 1929 revision. ' 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. (4)
[p.147] Paragraph 2
447 The principle introduced in the first sentence of this paragraph regarding the humane treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked,
is also taken from the Conventions. (5)
448 As stated in the Commentary to the first Convention:
"It is not sufficient to respect the wounded. They require ' care. ' If a soldier who is ' hors de combat ' is
respected and protected against injury of any kind, but is at
the same time left to struggle alone against the effects of
his wound or his sickness, he runs a great risk of
succumbing. There is therefore a positive, as well as a
negative, obligation: the wounded and sick must be given such
care as their condition requires. This fundamental principle
has remained unchanged since 1864." (6)
449 Moreover, humane treatment does not refer only to medical treatment, but applies "to all aspects of a man's existence". (7) It
is required under ' all circumstances ' from the moment that one
comes across a wounded, sick or shipwrecked person.
450 In practice, this requirement of humane treatment will generally be observed after the requirement for respect and protection. The
latter requirement should already be taken into account during the
battle, but only afterwards when it is possible to come and take care
of the wounded, can they be treated humanely and cared for.
451 The second stipulation was added by Committee II from a concern for the reality of the situation. The care required by the condition
of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked shall be given them ' to the
fullest extent practicable. ' This is again an expression of the
maxim "no one is expected to do the impossible", and one might say
that this addition to the text of the first draft was already
implicit in it. It is obvious that some wounded or sick persons could
be saved, or at any rate be better cared for, in the clinics of
wealthy countries which have the most advanced resources at their
disposal. However, the requirement imposed here relates to the
material possibilities existing in the place and at the time that the
wounded person is cared for. What is required is that everyone does
his utmost. If, because there is no doctor, an orderly is left to
care for the wounded on his own, he must do so to the best of its
ability. If there is no well-equipped clinic and the wounded must be
cared for in an antiquated hospital, an attempt should nevertheless
be made to use it to the maximum of its capacity.
452 An additional requirement is imposed with regard to the performance of these duties vis-à-vis the wounded, sick and
shipwrecked in the second sentence of paragraph 2: ' There shall be
no distinction among them founded on any grounds other than medical
ones. '
[p.148] 453 Article 12
of the first and Second Conventions contains a non-exhaustive list of the discriminatory criteria which cannot be
applied with regard to the victims. As we have seen, this list was
adopted and developed in Article 9
(' Field of application '),
paragraph 1, which determines the field of application ' ratione
personae ' of Part II. The principle laid down there applies to the
Part as a whole and there was no need to repeat it in Article 10
.
Thus the sentence which was finally included was not indispensable.
Nevertheless it is useful, as it emphasizes a particular application
of the principle which was stated in different words in Article 12
,
paragraph 3, of the First and Second Conventions: "Only urgent
medical reasons will authorize priority in the order of treatment to
be administered". This is a reminder to the personnel taking care of
the wounded that they shall ignore the nationality or uniform of the
person they are taking care of. The only reason for treating one
patient before another shall be because his wounds require more
urgent care, independently of any non-medical considerations.
454 On the other hand, neither the Conventions nor the Protocols specify which medical criteria should be observed. For example,
should an overburdened doctor launch into a long and hazardous
operation on an extremely seriously wounded patient, or should he
"sacrifice" this patient for the benefit of other patients whose
chances of survival are better? It is above all medical ethics and
the doctor's own conscience which must provide the answer to such a
question. (8)
' Y. S. '
NOTES
(1) Cf. commentary Art. 8, sub-para. (b), supra,
p. 118;
(2) Art. 12, First and Second Conventions; Art. 16, para. 1, Fourth Convention;
(3) On this subject, cf. commentary Art. 8, sub-paras. (a) and (b), supra, pp. 116-124;
(4) On the subject of these ideas, see also ' Commentary I, ' pp. 134-135;
(5) Cf. Art 12, para. 2, First and Second Conventions;
(6) ' Commentary I, ' pp. 136-137;
(7) Ibid., p. 137;
(8) On the subject of medical ethics, cf. commentary Art. 16, para. 1, infra, pp. 200-202;