ICRC databases on international humanitarian law
  • Print page
Commentary - Preamble
    In an article published well before the adoption of Additional Protocol III, Cornelio Sommaruga – then President of the ICRC – emphasized that "the plurality of signs gives evidence of division and of an inability to overcome certain divergences and to transcend religious or cultural differences" even though "in the public view the unity of the Movement should be reflected in a single emblem.[78]Unfortunately, the solution of a single emblem, though ideal in theory, was politically unattainable during the negotiations on Additional Protocol III. Not only was it difficult to imagine that the various components of the Movement would agree to revert to use of the red cross as a single emblem, it also quickly proved impossible to reach a consensus to abandon the existing emblems – to which millions of people have a profound attachment – for a new emblem common to all.
    Under these circumstances, the only available option for a comprehensive solution to the question of the emblem was to recognize an additional distinctive emblem devoid of any religious, political or other connotation. While preserving the historical emblems, this solution offered an alternative to components of the Movement that could not (or could no longer) use their traditional emblem in particular operational contexts. It also opened the door of the Movement to relief societies that persistently objected to the use of the red cross or red crescent, as they could henceforth adopt the red crystal. At the same time, the recognition of this additional emblem puts an end to any further demands for a new emblem.
    Besides accomplishing its main objective – to adopt an additional emblem with the same status as the red cross and red crescent – Additional Protocol III provides some flexibility in the use of the emblem. Indeed, even if the ICRC and the International Federation are currently determined to keep their current names and emblems, Additional Protocol III nevertheless allows them to use the red crystal in exceptional circumstances. It also gives the medical services and religious personnel participating in operations under the auspices of the United Nations - upon approval of participating States - the option of using a common emblem, which can either be the red crystal or another emblem recognized by the 1949 Conventions.
    Additional Protocol III also gives National Societies that choose the red crystal a flexibility that did not exist for the emblems recognized by the 1949 Geneva Conventions. Indeed, this instrument increases the available options by authorizing – albeit strictly for indicative use – the incorporation within the red crystal of one or a combination of emblems recognized in 1949 or even of another emblem that complies with certain conditions.
    The possibility of incorporation may prove to be extremely advantageous, especially for National Societies in countries with diverse religious communities. Indeed, where one part of the population identifies with one of the emblems of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and another with a second emblem, requiring a choice be made between them could create difficulties in terms of recruitment of volunteers, private donor contributions and above all the credibility of neutral action. While before Additional Protocol III the National Society had to choose one of those two emblems, it may now decide to use the red crystal alone or incorporate within it both the red cross and red crescent.
    This flexibility also enables National Societies to adopt the additional emblem without having to totally renounce the traditional red cross or red crescent, which they can incorporate within the red crystal. Without reverting to a single emblem, Additional Protocol III allows for the possibility of an eventual return to uniformity within a Movement composed of National Societies all having the red crystal as a common emblem, even if they incorporate different emblems within the crystal.


    Notes

    78. " Cornelio Sommaruga, "Unity and plurality of the emblems" International Review of the Red Cross, No. 796, July-August 1992.