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 Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III), 8 December 2005
Commentary -
Treaty relations upon entry into force of this Protocol
Article 12 - Treaty relations upon entry into force of this Protocol
1. Paragraph 1
The Protocols are instruments "additional" to the Geneva Conventions. As a result, their entry into force does not call into question the applicability of the Conventions – the Protocols supplement the Conventions, and do not subtract anything from them.
Article 12
, paragraph 1, clarifies the rule on conflicts of applicable law in case of potential incompatibility between the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol III. Protocol III does not take a novel approach to the matter in question. Instead, it borrows the solution already recommended by Article 96
, paragraph 1, of Additional Protocol I, which itself stems from a classic rule of the law of treaties already spelled out by the Vienna Convention of 1969, according to which the earlier treaty applies only to the extent that its provisions are compatible with those of the later treaty.
[70]
2. Paragraph 2
Article 12
, paragraph 2, is derived
mutatis mutandis
from the third paragraph of Article 2 common
to the Geneva Conventions (already replicated by Article 96
, paragraph 2, of Additional Protocol I). The first sentence rejects the
clausula si omnes
or the clause of universal participation. Thus, a party to a conflict bound by Additional Protocol III remains obliged to apply it in its relations with an adverse party that is also bound by the Protocol, even if one or more parties (adversary or ally) are not bound by this instrument.
While the first sentence of Article 12
, paragraph 2 (like the first paragraph), deals with the relations between parties having resorted to the classic methods of establishing treaty-based relationships (such as signature and then ratification, or accession), the second sentence provides for a particular means of entry into force of Additional Protocol III with respect to an ongoing conflict. This sentence entitles a State to consider the Protocol legally applicable between itself and the other parties to the conflict already bound by that instrument, even if that State was not able - at the time the armed conflict broke out – to complete the internal procedure to be bound by the Protocol. This provision is identical to Article 2
, paragraph 3, of the Geneva Conventions. The conditions for this kind of undertaking are already set forth in the Commentaries on the Conventions and on Additional Protocol I
[71].
Finally, while the two paragraphs of this provision are in all respects similar to Article 96
, paragraphs 1 and 2, of Additional Protocol I, paragraph 3 of Article 96
establishes a special procedure allowing for such an undertaking by the authority representing a people engaged in armed conflict for self-determination against a High Contracting Party. This aspect was not considered relevant in the context of Additional Protocol III and was therefore not included in it.
Notes
70.
Article 30, paragraph 3, of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties states that "[w]hen all the parties to the earlier treaty are parties also to the later treaty but the earlier treaty is not terminated (…), the earlier treaty applies only to the extent that its provisions are compatible with those of the later treaty." In fact this is a modern reformulation of a general principle derived from Latin law, according to which the later law overrules the earlier law (lex posterior derogate lege priori). Article 30, paragraph 4, provides for cases in which the parties to the earlier treaty are not all parties to the later treaty and rules that in this particular case, "(a) as between States parties to both treaties the same rule applies as in paragraph 3; ( b) as between a State party to both treaties and a State party to only one of the treaties, the treaty to which both States are parties governs their mutual rights and obligations."
71.
See
Commentary on the First Geneva Convention
, above note 4, pp. 33-37.
and will therefore not be discussed in detail here