Protection of victims of armed conflict through respect of International Humanitarian Law

Final Goal 1.1.
Full compliance by all the parties to an armed conflict with their obligations under international humanitarian law to better protect and assist the civilian population and other victims.

1. During recent armed conflicts, increasing numbers of civilians have been killed, wounded, treated without dignity, arbitrarily detained and/or separated from their families. They have been targeted on purpose, forced to leave their homes, and deprived of their basic rights as human beings, such as the right to supplies essential to their survival. In so-called "failed states" or "anarchic states", the central government, having effectively lost control over much, or all, of its territory, can no longer carry out its formal functions, which will lead gradually to the disintegration of state structures. As the state's monopoly on the use of force lessens, factions, warlords or bandits take "law and order" into their own hands, while civilians may take up arms to defend themselves: all leading to a spiral of violence. The armed groups' loose chains of command, coupled with their lack of responsibility, favour unbalanced behaviour. When civilians become the actual target of hostilities, as in "ethnic conflicts" for example, the basic rules protecting them are completely blurred. This is a sad characteristic of the post-Cold War era.

Under humanitarian law, the civilian population in general is protected from dangers arising from military operations. However, some groups among the population, such as children, women, the elderly, persons with disabilities and displaced people, have specific needs and are entitled to special attention. Civilians can also expect, under humanitarian law, adequate care and respect. But one of the most acute challenges facing humanitarian organisations at present is access to all the victims of an armed conflict.

The following points – (a) to (g) – look at important rules of protection which are of particular relevance in today's conflicts.

(a) One of the most important principles underlying humanitarian law is that of distinction between the civilian population and combatants, and between civilian objects and military objectives (Article 48 of Protocol I, Article 13 par. 2 of Protocol II). Attacks must be limited to military objectives, i.e., those objects which, by their nature, location, purpose or use, make an effective contribution to military action, and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralisation, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage. Indiscriminate attacks striking military objectives and civilians or civilians objects without distinction are prohibited. When launching an attack, two other principles have to be respected: proportionality in the military action and due precaution before deciding the attack. Numerous factors have to be taken into account before launching an attack, for example, the military importance of the target, the density of the civilian population, the likely effects of the attack, including the possible release of hazardous substances, the types of weapon available and the accuracy, mode and timing of the attack especially in the case of a mixed target. In case of doubt about the nature of an object, it is presumed to be civilian and should not be attacked.
In reality, far too often civilians and civilian objects, such as houses, places of worship and schools, are targeted on purpose. Attacks are sometimes launched against cities or villages because, it is argued, they contain military objectives. The attacks result in numerous casualties among the civilian population and damage to civilian objects, which, if excessive to the direct military advantage anticipated, are unacceptable. In areas where civilians are concentrated, clearly-separated military objectives should not be treated as a single military objective. Unless circumstances do not permit it, each party to the conflict shall give an effective advance warning prior to an attack which may affect the civilian population.

In some cases, civilians and prisoners are used as human shields to protect military objectives from attack. In others, the red cross or the red crescent emblem is used to mislead the enemy and conduct military actions. Simulation of protected status by using the red cross, the red crescent, UN or other protective emblems are considered as acts of perfidy, amounting to a grave breach of humanitarian law.

Basic needs and resources of the people have to be respected in time of armed conflict and starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is prohibited. In order to avoid prejudicing the health or survival of the population, humanitarian law stipulates that care shall be taken in warfare to protect the natural environment against widespread, long-term and severe damage. In many conflicts, widespread pillaging of civilian property occurs, and the destruction of crops, drinking water installations and irrigation works places the population under prolonged hardship. The bombing of oil installations or chemical plants has led to major ecological damage in some regions of the world.

(b) In a variety of contexts, regular armies, as well as paramilitary and rebel forces, continue to subject the civilian population to countless, unspeakable acts of violence. Widespread murders, "ethnic cleansing", rape, torture and hostage-taking are commonly recorded violations. The warring parties use threats and spread terror among civilians to reach their military and political objectives. Military operations are sometimes conducted on the basis that no mercy will be shown. Minorities are not always allowed to speak their own language, to practice their religion or to play their music, and are therefore profoundly affected in their cultural and religious identity. Regularly, medical personnel are barred from carrying out their work or are under pressure to perform tasks contrary to the rules of medical ethics (for example, they are obliged to take care of people regardless of the urgency of other cases). Ambulances are used for purposes other than their humanitarian function, i.e., to transport soldiers or arms. Medical personnel and units, as well as religious personnel, are occasionally targeted on purpose.

According to humanitarian law, all people not taking a direct part in hostilities shall be treated humanely in all circumstances, without any adverse distinction. They are entitled to respect for themselves, their honour, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs (Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions, Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 4 of Protocol II). Military and civilian medical personnel and medical units or transports shall be respected and protected in all circumstances.

As a possible means to enhance the protection of the wounded and civilians against the effects of hostilities, parties to a conflict can decide to create different kinds of humanitarian zones (Article 23 of the First Geneva Convention, Articles 14 and 15 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Articles 59 and 60 of Protocol I). Experience shows that such measures are likely to be respected only if they are temporary and well defined. Nevertheless, in situations of increasing threats on civilians and lack of commitment of the parties to respect humanitarian law, security zones may be decided by the UN Security Council without the consent of the parties. In that case, necessary resources and means must be granted to protect the people. However, caution must be taken before deciding to establish security zones: in particular, the situation of the civilians living outside the zone should be clarified and the right to seek asylum in other countries should not be undermined. Like humanitarian zones, security zones must always be demilitarised and it should be made clear that their aim is to give temporary shelter and not to provide an amnesty.

The massive and continuing violations of humanitarian law can be stopped and deterred only if the responsible parties undertake to translate their commitments into concrete measures. In cases of conflicts, training, regular supervision and evaluation of the conduct of all people under their responsibility become even more important. Strict orders must be given by the commanders in order to prevent any misconduct of their troops and, where necessary, they have to suppress and report the violations to the competent authorities.

(c) Tragically, contemporary armed conflicts are frequently characterised by massive displacement of populations, both within and across international borders. This phenomenon is particularly prevalent in non-international armed conflicts, where displacement is often regarded as a strategy of warfare, and sometimes even constitutes the very objective of the protagonists to the conflict.

A large number of those affected live in rural areas, are highly dependent on their land, and thus resist displacement as long as possible. Accordingly, the level of danger has to be particularly high, and flight perceived as the only chance for survival, before they take the decision to flee their homes. In such situations, displacement often occurs in an extremely hostile, chaotic and violent environment where meagre means are available for saving their lives. Apart from the traumatic conditions of their departure and flight, the displaced often experience problems during the time they are displaced, and frequently face numerous obstacles to returning home. As a result of this, they are extremely vulnerable and it is imperative to provide them with necessary assistance and protection. The immense human suffering, not only of the displaced themselves, but also of those left behind and for host communities, demonstrates the urgent need to reduce the occurrence of forced displacement.

To a large extent, forced displacement results from the failure of parties to an armed conflict to abide by their obligations under humanitarian law. Indeed, in addition to the protection provided by rules governing the conduct of hostilities and those concerning the treatment of persons in the power of a party to the conflict, humanitarian law contains important restraints on the possibility of those parties to undertake forced displacement. Prohibition against forcibly displacing the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict has long been considered a customary rule of international law. In addition, existing instruments also contain express prohibitions of such practices, both in international and non-international armed conflicts (in Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention and in Article 17 of Protocol II respectively). When, exceptionally, evacuations take place, there exists an obligation to ensure that these are carried out in satisfactory conditions. An obligation to allow people to return also exists both in cases of lawful evacuations and in cases of illegal displacement. In the former case, this obligation may be expressly articulated and, in the latter, the duty implicitly follows from the more general obligation to redress and minimise violations of the law. Therefore, the full respect of humanitarian law would not only contribute to ease the plight of the displaced, but also considerably reduce the very occurrence of forced displacement.

It is important to note that the protection provided by humanitarian law to displaced people affected by armed conflict is supplemented and reinforced by other regimes of international law. Refugees benefit from a number of basic provisions of human rights law and, of course, also from applicable regional and global refugee law instruments. Internally displaced people remain entitled to the full range of human rights law, on an equal footing with any other inhabitants of their countries. Last year, the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement were presented to the Commission on Human Rights by the UN Secretary-General's representative on internally displaced people. The principles provide useful guidance on how relevant international standards are to be interpreted and applied.

(d) In numerous conflict situations, the conditions of deprivation of liberty remain precarious, if not disastrous. In total violation of the spirit and the letter of conventional and customary law, children, women and men continue to live and die in appalling conditions, characterised by inhumane treatment; summary executions; forced disappearances; torture and ill-treatment; lack of medical, sanitary and nutritional attention; arbitrary, abusive and prolonged detention; and hostage-taking. Policies sanctioning massive arrests, the paralysis of judiciary and penal systems, a lack of resources, the subordination of humanitarian considerations to political ones, as well as indifference and neglect are the main factors worsening the situation of detainees.

According to humanitarian law, prisoners of war (PoWs) and detainees have to be protected and respected in all circumstances. The detaining authorities are held responsible for unlawful acts or omissions causing the death or seriously endangering the health of prisoners. If subjected to judicial proceedings, detainees, internees and PoWs enjoy all the fundamental judicial guarantees and no sentence may be passed except pursuant to a conviction pronounced by an impartial and regularly constituted court (Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions, Article 99 ff. of the Third Geneva Convention, Article 71 ff. of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 75 of Protocol I, Article 6 of Protocol II). The ICRC has a right to visit all places where PoWs or internees may be held, and shall be able to interview them without witness and repeat the visit whenever necessary (Article 126 of the Third Geneva Convention, Article 143 of the Fourth Geneva Convention).

In a number of cases, the current lack of respect for humanitarian law and for fundamental judicial guarantees causes arbitrary and abusive deprivation of freedom. Years after the end of hostilities, thousands of PoWs still remain as political bargaining chips and are denied the right to release, repatriation or family reunification, in contradiction with the provisions of the Third Geneva Convention. Likewise, interned persons are not released even if the reasons which motivated their internment no longer exist. Often, the detainees are not informed of the offence they are alleged to have committed, they have no access to a lawyer and wait weeks, if not years, before seeing a judge.

(e) For many people, one of the most tragic consequences of armed conflicts is the uncertainty surrounding the fate of their relatives. Many rules of humanitarian law deal directly with this problem. As soon as a combatant is captured by the enemy, he becomes a PoW and the detaining power has the obligation to notify him to the power on which the prisoner depends through the ICRC's Central Tracing Agency. The PoW is allowed to write a "Capture Card" to the ICRC's Central Tracing Agency and to his family, informing them of his capture, address and state of health (Articles 69 and 70 of the Third Geneva Convention). Internees have the same prerogatives (Article 106 of the Fourth Geneva Convention).

All the parties to an armed conflict undertake to ensure, in particular, that every effort is made to clarify the fate of all those unaccounted for and to inform the families accordingly. At the end of active hostilities, at the latest, each party to the conflict shall search for those reported missing and relevant information be transmitted to the ICRC's Central Tracing Agency or to the National Society. The remains of people who have died in detention or as a result of the hostilities shall be respected, as shall their grave-sites. The grave-sites shall be properly maintained and marked in such a way that they can be located and recognised. The dead will be identified, their families informed, and the mortal remains returned to them.

Notwithstanding the right of families to know the fate of their relatives, States often appear to lack the determination to comply with their conventional obligations to investigate and provide information on the whereabouts of missing people. In some cases, no authority has been nominated to handle these questions and no central database is organised; the result is confusion and delays. Unidentified prisoners and combatants killed on the battlefield are buried in mass graves. In order to be able to clarify the fate of a person and inform his family as soon as possible, certain measures should already be taken in peacetime and appropriate procedures put into place from the beginning of a conflict. It is imperative that identification cards be distributed to combatants and competent authorities be entrusted with this task.

(f) The special vulnerability of children in armed conflicts has long been recognised. Under humanitarian law, specific rules concerning children have been added to the general obligation made to the parties of a conflict to respect the civilian population. Some provisions are directly concerned with children's honour, their well-being or their development (Article 77 of Protocol I and Article 4, paragraph 3 of Protocol II). In particular, the parties to a conflict should provide all children, including those held in detention, with the care and the education they require. The death penalty shall not be carried out against a child who was under 18 at the time of the offence.

Other rules insist on the importance of the environment of the child and require that children can live with their relatives. The parties to a conflict should facilitate the reunion of families dispersed as a result of armed conflicts. In that respect, humanitarian organisations, and in particular the components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, can play a substantive role in helping the concerned authorities. In some exceptional cases, for medical or security reasons, the best way to protect children is to evacuate them to a foreign country or to a safer area inside the country. In such cases, safeguards should be provided to ensure that the consent of the parents is given and that this measure is taken temporarily.

Enforced prostitution, indecent assault and other misuse of children have been observed in various contexts. Girls may suffer specific outrages and particular attention should be paid to their protection. In many regions, child soldiers have been seen on the battlefield, despite the legal interdiction on recruiting children under 15 (see also point 6 below) years of age.

(g) In situations of armed conflict, States, including the occupying powers, have, first and foremost the responsibility for protecting and assisting the populations under their control, and should organise and carry out necessary relief actions. In addition, if civilians are suffering hardship because supplies essential to their survival and well-being are lacking, the warring parties should support and facilitate relief actions undertaken by humanitarian and impartial organisations (Articles 23, 59, 60 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 70 of Protocol I, Article 18 paragraph 2 of Protocol II). States have consistently agreed, mostly through resolutions of the UN Security Council or its General Assembly, that all parties to a conflict are obliged to grant access for humanitarian aid to all people in need.

During recent armed conflicts, warring parties placed obstacles in the way of humanitarian assistance for the civilian population. Frequently, the parties to a conflict impede the activities of humanitarian organisations, such as the ICRC, from carrying out their mandate to assist and protect the victims. Access to the civilian population is denied, either by questioning the strictly humanitarian purpose of ICRC action or by invoking security reasons. In many cases, the refusal is not consistent with the real situation prevailing in the field. It should be noted, however, that the International Court of Justice has confirmed that relief actions carried out in accordance with the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement cannot be regarded as interference in internal affairs.

2. It is essential that, in non-international armed conflicts, rebels, insurgents and other armed opposition groups fully respect the set of rules which apply in these situations, i.e., Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions, Protocol II of 1977 and customary rules. In that regard, armed opposition groups are encouraged to declare publicly their commitment to live up to their legal obligations. However, formal declarations of intent by armed opposition groups are not sufficient; they must be followed by concrete actions. There must be both the capacity and a real will to respect promises to comply with humanitarian law; the commitments cannot be used merely for political purposes. Armed opposition groups also have a duty to teach humanitarian law to their forces.

In addition, common Article 3 states that "the Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention." It is regrettable that, in practice, this invitation to go beyond the fundamental principles contained in common Article 3 has rarely been translated into action. Both States and armed opposition groups should, therefore, endeavour to extend the body of applicable law to include, if at all possible, the entirety of humanitarian law.

Declarations of intent by armed opposition groups and ad hoc agreements between fighting parties will ultimately benefit great numbers of people, and more particularly innocent civilians.

3. To be able to carry out its mandate, the ICRC seeks to establish a constructive dialogue with all the parties concerned and requests them to provide satisfactory guarantees that its action and personnel will be respected and protected. The ICRC works relentlessly to persuade all the authorities concerned to respect humanitarian law, to assume their obligations and to co-operate fully with the components of the Movement in accordance with the latters' respective mandates, competence and principles. In particular, the ICRC continues to adopt a strictly independent, neutral and impartial stance when performing its activities. It abstains from any action not exclusively aimed at improving the situation of the victims of the conflict, wherever they may be. In the field, the ICRC and the other components of the Movement are protected solely by the red cross and red crescent emblems and refuse, in principle, armed protection from anyone. In situations where host governments fail to ensure security while the population are experiencing a grave hardship, the international community has to take the appropriate measures to secure the environment in order to ensure that humanitarian workers are able to carry out their work in accordance with their mandates and principles of action (see also Final Goal 2.4.).

As specified in the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, one important role of the ICRC is to work for the understanding and dissemination of knowledge of humanitarian law and for its faithful application. In close co-operation with the International Federation and National Societies, the ICRC runs a variety of projects to promote and raise awareness and understanding of humanitarian rules and principles amongst all categories of people. Emphasis is placed on those who are, or may, take part in armed hostilities (see Final Goal 1.4.). When observing violations of humanitarian law, the ICRC approaches the concerned authorities and requests that they take the appropriate measures in order to suppress them. Such interventions towards the parties to the conflict concerned are made on a confidential basis, unless the gravity of the facts, the lack of success of confidential representations and the interests of the victims require a public denunciation. National Societies also play a major role in assisting their governments to promote humanitarian law and ensure respect for it. In many situations, they have to make representations in order to guarantee respect for the red cross and red crescent emblem.

Although the proper and full implementation of humanitarian law remains the major objective, States have shown their willingness to enhance protection of victims of armed conflicts by appropriately developing the law. The ICRC, as promoter and "guardian" of humanitarian law, has taken an active role in elaborating several new treaties (the more recently amended Protocol II of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons concerning landmines, Protocol IV of the same convention concerning blinding weapons, the Ottawa Treaty on Anti-Personnel Mines, the Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Second Protocol to the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property).

4. The question of applicability of humanitarian law to peace-keeping or peace enforcement forces has been of concern to the ICRC for a long time. As the nature of UN forces has drastically evolved in the last decade – leading troops to use force even outside situations of self-defence – this question has become even more acute.

The UN has formally undertaken the responsibility vis-à-vis third States to ensure respect for humanitarian law by "blue helmets" by including a clause in the Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) concluded between the UN and the States in whose territories UN peace-keeping forces are deployed. For many years, the UN was of the opinion that its forces were bound by the "principles and spirit" of humanitarian law treaties. The clause in the more recent SOFAs refers to the applicability of "rules and principles" of humanitarian law.

To aid clarifying the scope of application of humanitarian law, the ICRC organised two meetings in 1995 with experts from military and academic circles, former commanders of UN forces and officials from the services concerned at the UN Secretariat. The participants prepared a draft set of guidelines which was reviewed jointly by the UN Office of Legal Affairs and the ICRC, and a final text was established in May 1996.

The guidelines were finally published by the UN Secretary General on 10 August 1999, under the title Observance by United Nations forces of international humanitarian law

These guidelines should be referred to when UN forces are actively engaged as combatants in either peace-keeping or peace enforcement operations conducted under UN command and control. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of compulsory principles and rules of humanitarian law for military personnel, who also remain bound by their national laws and applicable humanitarian law rules binding their countries of origin.

The ICRC regards these guidelines as an important and common basic military manual for forces under the UN flag.

5. As stipulated in Article 1 common to all four Geneva Conventions, the High Contracting Parties undertake to respect and ensure respect for the Geneva Conventions in all circumstances. It is, therefore, the responsibility of States to make all efforts to prevent or impede the continuation of violations of humanitarian law by another party. It is important to stress that this responsibility cannot be shifted to humanitarian organisations, such as the ICRC, although they may contribute in their own right to the implementation of humanitarian law.

However, common Article 1 does not precisely define the means and method to fulfil this legal and political responsibility. The appropriate measures have to be decided upon by the States and recognised interstate organisations, whether regional or universal. It consists primarily of diplomatic and economic measures. When exerting sanctions against a State, an appropriate humanitarian exception to sanctions regimes, adequate in terms of the needs of the population and the requirements of humanitarian law and human rights law, should always be included. The humanitarian impact of sanctions on the civilian population must be assessed, monitored and considered at all stages of the decision-making process (see Final Goal 2.3.).

Humanitarian law shall not be invoked, as such, as a basis for the use of force. Should the recourse to force be considered the appropriate answer to a very serious violation of humanitarian law, this decision should be taken within the framework of Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Article 89 of Protocol I stipulates that, in situations of serious violations of the Conventions or of Protocol I, the High Contracting Parties shall act, jointly or individually, in co-operation with the UN. But, any international response must respect the United Nations Charter, the principles of international law and humanitarian law. The possible humanitarian consequences must be taken into account.

Whenever possible, regional intergovernmental organisations should participate in the efforts to promote compliance with humanitarian law. When endorsed with the responsibility of implementing measures agreed upon at the UN, regional organisations shall act in conformity with humanitarian law.

In all cases, the ICRC must be in a position to act in a completely neutral and independent manner and free of any politically-motivated constraints in order to carry out its humanitarian mandate in accordance with its principles.

6. Today, when new forms of warfare are being developed and belligerents are adopting new combat strategies, children are increasingly affected by conflicts. Far from being spared the horrors of war, children are often placed at the very heart of current conflicts, and become one of its main victims, not only because they form a large part of the civilian population but also because of their extreme vulnerability.

Conflict can wound children, both physically and mentally, for life. They are often helpless witnesses of atrocities committed against members of their families. Far too many children are still killed, wounded or mutilated by anti-personnel mines, torn from their familiar surroundings, separated from their families, detained or imprisoned, forced to flee and to seek refuge in another area or country, left to fall back on their own resources, deprived of their roots and, sometimes, even of their very identity.

Evidence shows that children need even greater care and protection if they have experienced violence, suffering and trauma generated by armed conflict.

This concern has been reflected in numerous statements or declarations in international forums and resolutions adopted in the framework of International Conferences of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. In this manner, the 26th International Conference reaffirmed the absolute necessity to take all measures to guarantee that children enjoy the protection and assistance to which they are entitled under national and international law. For its part, the Movement adopted, in 1995, the Plan of Action concerning Children in Armed Conflict (CABAC) (Council of Delegates, Resolution 5).

Legal provisions do exist both in terms of general and special protection which benefit children. For the most part, these provisions are adequate and must be promoted. It is, therefore, less the search for new instruments than the true implementation and respect for these measures that needs to be reinforced. First and foremost, it is essential that politicians and those bearing arms be made familiar with, and made to apply, humanitarian law. In a world where an ever-greater number of civilians and, by consequence, children affected by conflicts and other forms of violence, it has also become necessary to sensitise a wider population to the principles of humanitarian conduct, as enshrined in humanitarian law. The international community must therefore mobilise itself and contribute more effectively to ensure that children benefit from all provisions and measures aimed at securing their protection and assistance.

It is equally important that children are able, at all times, to have access to education and recreational activities. In all cultures, education in the home, in society and at school plays a central role in passing on modes of behaviour and attitudes. Communities wishing to preserve human values must do their utmost to prevent young people from becoming involved in conflict as either victims or protagonists. Society must teach young people the minimum standards of behaviour which will ensure that human dignity and integrity are respected both in times of war and of peace.

The preventive aspect of such activities should also not be neglected as they are ways of avoiding exclusion and marginalisation, both of which can lead to violence when children are left to their own devices and without social and cultural frames of reference.
It is also particularly worrying to note that the number of children recruited or voluntarily enlisting in actual conflicts keeps increasing, in violation of humanitarian law. Very young children are all too frequently given weapons and urged to commit the worst atrocities under the orders of unscrupulous individuals who recruit them in order to take advantage of their youth, immaturity and distress.

It is therefore vital to prevent and eradicate all forms of participation of children in hostilities. The Statute of the International Criminal Court is an important element contributing to a better respect of humanitarian law provisions as regards a ban on recruitment and participation of children in armed conflicts. The Statute includes, in its list of war crimes, the acts of conscripting or enlisting children under the age of 15 in the armed forces or in armed groups, and making them actively take part in hostilities. It should be noted that the concept of participation must extend both to direct participation in fighting and to active involvement in duties or activities related to combat, such as reconnaissance, spying, sabotage, and the use of children as decoys, messengers or at military checkpoints.

Certainly some standards can be improved, for example those which relate to the age of recruitment and participation in hostilities. It is in this framework that the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is advocating to raise the minimum age of recruitment and participation in hostilities to 18 years. This should apply in both international and non-international armed conflicts, and to all parties to a conflict, including armed groups.

To complement these normative measures, there must be an effort to encourage the implementation and development of practical means of prevention to give children an alternative which will dissuade them from having to join armed forces or armed groups as a means of survival. It is equally important to implement innovative programmes aimed at meeting the physical, psychological and social needs of child victims of armed conflicts and their families. Finally, it is necessary to help these children and a fortiori former child soldiers to return to their communities and the social and cultural environment from which they came.

The process of rehabilitation and social reintegration is crucial for the future of former child soldiers. Failing this, there is a danger that, on the one hand, they will never be able to readapt to a normal life and, on the other, will become easy prey to be re-engaged in fighting or violence, or will slide into delinquency. Faced with all the aspects of this problem, people's attitudes also need to change notably with regard to education for both adults and children. To achieve these measures, it is important that civil society in the countries concerned should be involved at every stage of the process, in order to promote the respect for guaranteed standards of protection for children in conflict, to permit them to find alternatives to enlisting or to help their reinsertion in their homes and communities

7. The problems experienced by women in situations of armed conflict have received increased attention in recent years, both within and outside the International Movement of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

A number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have contributed to raising international awareness on this subject, and several initiatives have been taken within academic circles to examine existing normative frameworks and operational responses. The problems have been discussed among governments as well, both in the context of meetings focusing specifically on women (such as the 1995 Beijing Conference), and by forums with a broader agenda, such as the UN Commission on Human Rights, General Assembly or regional organisations.

The desire to better address the problems faced by women in situations of armed conflict has equally been reflected in resolutions pertaining to the International Movement of the Red Cross and Red Crescent as a whole, and in more specific decisions taken within the ICRC.

Thus, the 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, in its resolution entitled "Protection of the civilian population in periods of armed conflict", urged "that strong measures be taken to provide women with the protection and assistance to which they are entitled under national and international law." It also encouraged "States, the Movement and other competent entities and organisations to develop preventive measures, assess existing programmes and set up new programmes to ensure that women victims of conflict receive medical, psychological and social assistance, provided if possible by qualified personnel who are aware of the specific issues involved."

Within the context of an internal review process aimed at identifying current challenges facing the ICRC and how these should be addressed (Exercice Avenir), it was decided, inter alia, to follow attentively the needs for clarification or development of humanitarian law pertaining to certain problems or categories of people, and where necessary, to take appropriate measures. Among which, it was decided to develop and implement guidelines of an operational and/or legal nature regarding the role and protection of women in conflict situations.

The ultimate objective is to enhance the assistance and protection of women affected by armed conflicts, by sensitising relevant actors to their specific needs, by improving the quality and the pertinence of activities carried out on their behalf and by empowering the women themselves.

To this end, the ICRC has started a project to examine how women are affected by armed conflict, the extent to which their needs are being addressed, and how the response can be improved. The process would include:

The identification and analysis of women's assistance and protection needs, including their access to basic goods and services such as food, water, shelter and primary health care. To some extent, the analysis also includes a review of the "strategic" needs of women, such as their involvement in decision-making processes. Such empowerment would aim at ensuring the better access to the above-mentioned resources and services by war-affected women, including assuring that humanitarian assistance better reaches the intended beneficiaries. It would also aim to enhance the capacity of women to overcome the problems they face during conflict, and thereby also benefit the communities in which they live (for instance, skills training may increase household assets, improve nutrition and reduce child mortality).
The drawing up of a realistic and comprehensive picture of activities undertaken by the ICRC in favour of women victims of armed conflict.
An assessment of whether these activities adequately respond to the needs identified.
The examination of humanitarian law, in order to assess the extent to which it provides an adequate coverage for the needs identified. To some extent, other sources of international law (i.e., human rights law and refugee law) will also be examined, in order to identify relevant sources of law where humanitarian law is silent or no longer applicable.
On the basis of the above, the formulation of guidelines enhancing the assistance and protection of women in situations of armed conflict.

It should be noted that this initiative is in line with a basic principle for ICRC activities, namely that victims should be assisted in accordance with their needs. In line with the general objective that operations have the best possible impact on the target groups they are designed to assist and protect, effective programming must recognise the particular situation of women. Programmes therefore need to be designed and implemented in consultation with, and with the participation of, women in order to be effective and to avoid a negative impact on their socio-economic situation. The study aims to draw lessons from past and current experiences and improve the quality, relevance and impact of ICRC services.

To some extent, the study should also help to better address challenges faced by women in post-conflict situations, and thereby be of interest to all the components of the International Movement of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.

The systematic collection of information has already started, through a request to field delegations to provide periodic reports regarding activities carried out in favour of women and children. In addition to drawing upon documents produced by UN bodies, agencies, NGOs and universities, it is hoped that valuable information will be provided by war-affected women themselves, in the context of the campaign marking the 50th anniversary of the Geneva Conventions (which includes circulating a questionnaire to cross-sections of the population in different countries, and holding discussions among representative groups – including women). In the year 2000, it is envisaged to submit a first draft of the study to a number of institutions and individuals interested in, and with expertise on, the matter, including National Societies and the International Federation, in order to refine and complement the study and the formulation of guidelines.

Final Goal 1.2.
An effective barrier against impunity through the combination of international treaties and national laws concerning the repression of violations of international humanitarian law, and the establishment of an equitable system of reparations.

8. On the basis of the principle of universal jurisdiction, States have a duty to search for persons alleged to have committed, or to have ordered to be committed, serious violations (i.e., war crimes), and shall bring such persons, regardless of their nationality, before its own courts (Articles 49/50/129/146 of the four Geneva Conventions, 85 Additional Protocol I). They may also hand over such suspects to another State for prosecution (aut dedere aut punire). In all circumstances, the accused shall "benefit by safeguards of proper trial and defence." With respect to other violations of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols, each High Contracting Party is obliged to take necessary measures to ensure their suppression. In accordance with Article 14 of the 1996 Amended Mines Protocol, States shall take all appropriate steps, including legislative and other measures, to prevent and suppress violations by persons or on territory under its jurisdiction or control. These measures include the imposition of penal sanctions against persons who wilfully kill or cause serious injury to civilians and to bring such persons to justice. According to Article 9 of the 1997 Ottawa Convention banning anti-personnel landmines, States are obliged to take all appropriate legal, administrative and other measures, including the imposition of penal sanctions, to prevent and suppress any prohibited activity under this treaty undertaken by persons or on territory under its jurisdiction or control.

The creation of the two ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda was an important first step to stop the impunity of war criminals. According to the respective Statutes, States are bound to comply with requests for arrest and surrender or transfer of the accused to the International Tribunals. Since the system of penal repression has rarely been applied by States at the national level, the 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, following recommendations of the International Conference for the Protection of War Victims and of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts for the Protection of War Victims, urged States in Resolution 2:

to increase international efforts,
to bring before courts and punish war criminals and those responsible for serious violations of humanitarian law,
to establish permanently an international criminal court.

While many war criminals still remain unpunished, States adopted on 17 July 1998 at the Diplomatic Conference in Rome, the Statute for the establishment of an International Criminal Court (ICC). This court, which will be created after the deposit of the 60th instrument of ratification, should greatly contribute to ending the present reign of impunity. States parties to the ICC Statute will be duty-bound to comply with requests for arrest and surrender of alleged war criminals, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Statute and the procedure under their national law. However, the primary responsibility for enforcement of humanitarian law rests with national authorities. The jurisdiction of the ICC is intended to come into play only when a national judicial system is genuinely unable or unwilling to act in relation to individuals over whom they would normally have jurisdiction. To benefit from this principle of complementarity, States will need to have adequate legislation enabling them to prosecute war criminals.

Nothing in the Statute releases States from their obligations under existing instruments of humanitarian law to which they are party or from their customary international law obligations. This fact is important as there are certain humanitarian law obligations which are not covered in the Statute, such as some of the grave breach provisions of Additional Protocol I, and obligations under the Ottawa Convention. States parties to Additional Protocol I and to the Ottawa Convention are still required to enact implementing legislation to give effect to their obligations under these treaties.

9. The 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent reaffirmed in Resolution 2 the rule derived from Article 91 of Protocol I that any party to an armed conflict which violates humanitarian law shall, if the case demands, be liable to pay compensation. Articles 51/52/131/148 of the four Geneva Conventions, according to which no State party shall be allowed to absolve itself or any other State party of any liability incurred by itself or by another State party in respect of breaches under the conventions, contain the same principle. The obligation applies to all parties to the conflict. Thus, no distinction is made between the victor and the vanquished, nor between a party which is presumed to have resorted to force unlawfully and a party which is believed only to have exercised its right of self-defence.

Compensation will be due only if restitution in kind or the restoration of the situation existing before the violation are not possible. Such compensation is usually expressed in the form of a sum of money which must correspond either to the value of the object for which restitution is not possible, or to an indemnity which is proportional to the loss suffered. If the compensation is assessed in terms of material goods, it may never consist of cultural property (Protocol of The Hague for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 14 May 1954, Part I, paragraph 3).

These rules form the legal framework for reparations in the law of armed conflicts. However, no generally accepted principles or guidelines with respect to appropriate mechanisms or procedures for the exercise of rights by the victims (e.g., standing of victims, competence of courts, etc.) exist. Since the early 1990s, independent experts received a mandate from the Commission on Human Rights to draft such principles and guidelines. The final report, with a view to its adoption by the UN General Assembly, will be submitted at the end of 1999. Extensive consultations between interested governments, intergovernmental organisations and non-governmental organisations are needed to create universally acceptable guidelines reflecting the various legal cultures and traditions of the world. Considerable efforts have been undertaken in recent years. It is now the time to achieve results which can be implemented and respect existing humanitarian law.

With respect to the competence of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the field of reparations, Article 75 of the Statute stipulates that the court establish principles relating to reparations and, on this basis, in its decision it may determine the scope and extent of any damage, loss and injury to, or in respect of, victims. The ICC may make an order directly against a convicted person specifying appropriate reparations, including restitution, compensation and rehabilitation. However, it must be emphasised that nothing in that article may be interpreted as prejudicing the rights of victims under national or international law (Article 75 (6) ICC Statute).

Final Goal 1.3.
Universal acceptance of international humanitarian law and the adoption of all necessary measures by States at the national level to ensure the implementation of their treaty obligations.

10. The fiftieth anniversary of the Geneva Conventions is a rare opportunity to reflect on the rules designed to protect human dignity in the midst of armed conflict. Their provisions were reaffirmed and developed some 20 years ago in the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions. These treaties, which set out rules to protect the victims of armed conflict from the effects of war – and the civilian population in particular – remain perfectly relevant today.

Many other treaties complete the rules on the conduct of hostilities. Amongst them, the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, and its two Protocols. The second of the Protocols to the Convention was adopted on 26 March 1999. Given that the 1954 mechanism of cultural property under special protection never really worked, the Second Protocol establishes a new system. Cultural property of the greatest importance for humanity can be placed under enhanced protection provided it is adequately protected by domestic law and it is not used for military purposes or to shield military sites.

The 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons applies two general customary rules of humanitarian law to specific weapons. These customary rules are (1) the prohibition of the use of weapons which are by their nature indiscriminate and (2) the prohibition of the use of weapons which cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury. The convention is completed by four Protocols : Non-Detectable Fragments; Mines, Booby Traps and Other Devices; Incendiary Weapons; and Blinding Laser Weapons.

Anti-personnel mines cannot distinguish between soldiers and civilians and usually kill or severely mutilate their victims. The 1997 Convention on the Prohibition of Anti-personnel Mines and on their Destruction is part of the international response to the widespread suffering caused by these weapons.

The 1998 Statute of the International Criminal Court seeks to put an end to the reign of impunity and to ensure that those who commit grave crimes do not go unpunished. The court will have jurisdiction over war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and over the crime of aggression once defined. By virtue of the principle of complementarity, the jurisdiction of the court is intended to come into play only when a State is genuinely unable or unwilling to prosecute alleged criminals over which it has jurisdiction.

It is also important that States adhere to humanitarian law treaties with the least reservations possible and that they re-examine existing violations with a view to repealing them.

Considerable efforts have been undertaken in recent years to either draft new treaties or update existing ones with a view to ensuring a better protection of war victims. It is now of the utmost importance to implement the existing body of law through its universal acceptance.

11. Wide dissemination and full implementation of such law at the national level also needs to be stressed. Implementation is the major challenge facing international law today. The problem of translating States' legal obligations into action is common to all areas of international law. There is, however, a particularly sharp contrast between humanitarian law's highly developed rules, many of which enjoy universal acceptance, and the repeated violations of those rules in conflicts around the world.

While a number of international mechanisms have been developed to promote compliance with humanitarian law, States themselves have the primary responsibility for implementation. Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, States have clear obligations to ensure that humanitarian law is implemented and respected, and to adopt a range of national legislative and administrative measures to this end.

The promotion of national implementing measures has been a long-standing concern of the ICRC and the Movement as a whole. It has been included on the agendas of several International Conferences of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. The United Nations General Assembly reviews on a biannual basis the status of the Additional Protocols, and has also extended the scope of certain resolutions to statutes of other instruments of humanitarian law and the national implementation and promotion measures in general.

The implementation of humanitarian law requires a variety of measures. Firstly, humanitarian law treaties must be incorporated into domestic or national law. Secondly, States must ensure that their law provides punishment for:

grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I;
misuse of the emblem (the emblems, designations, signs and signals protected by the Geneva Conventions, the Additional Protocols and the Cultural Property Convention);
violations of the 1954 Cultural Property Convention;
violations of the 1997 Ottawa Convention; and
wilfully killing or causing serious injury to civilians through violations of amended Protocol II (landmines) of the 1980 Conventional Weapons Convention.

Finally, States must adopt a variety of other implementation measures to give effect to obligations, for example:

translation of these treaties into national languages;
dissemination within the armed forces and the general public;
identification of protected persons and places;
protection of fundamental and procedural guarantees;
legal advisers in armed forces;
national information bureau.

To assist with the measures described above, many States have established national humanitarian law committees to advise the government on implementation and dissemination of this law. Such committees – bringing together representatives of the various ministries concerned with the application of the law, the National Society, civil defence organisations, academics, the health profession, etc. – are recommended as a means to further implementation. More than 45 national committees have been created world-wide and, to improve co-operation among them, the ICRC has either organised or collaborated in a number of regional meetings and exchanges. These national committees are encouraged to send in information on the measures taken and planned to the ICRC Advisory Service on International Humanitarian Law.

12. In 1995, the ICRC established a special unit, the Advisory Service on International Humanitarian Law, to advise governments on the ratification of humanitarian law treaties and on the national measures necessary to fully implement their obligations under humanitarian law. The service's creation was prompted by the recommendation of the Intergovernmental Group of Experts for the Protection of War Victims (Geneva, January 1995) – subsequently endorsed by the 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (Geneva, December 1995) – that the ICRC strengthen its capacity to advise and assist States in their efforts to implement and disseminate humanitarian law.

The ICRC Advisory Service on International Humanitarian Law exists to assist States in their efforts to implement the law at the national level. In many States, the National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society is also able to provide assistance and expertise. The service always works in close co-operation with the National Society of the country concerned.

The Advisory Service's three main priorities have been to promote ratification of humanitarian law treaties, to promote national implementation of obligations under these treaties and to collect and facilitate the exchange of information regarding national implementation measures.

Since its establishment, the service has had contacts with representatives from over 100 countries world-wide. National and regional seminars on humanitarian law implementation have been organised in more than 50 countries and over 70 governments have been advised on legislation and related issues. Experts meetings were convened on national humanitarian law commissions (Geneva, 1996), national measures to repress violations of humanitarian law in civil law systems (Geneva, 1997) and the enforcement of humanitarian law in common-law countries (Geneva, 1998). In the light of the discussions during these meetings, the Advisory Service drew up guiding principles offering lawmakers practical guidance on the different issues. A collection of laws and documents on steps taken by States to implement humanitarian law at the national level is being put together. To facilitate the exchange of information, traditional and electronic filing systems are used. An electronic catalogue of all documents has been created. The documents are classified by subject and by country, and may be consulted by any interested party. Furthermore, a database on national measures for the implementation of humanitarian law is being set up. With this database, which constitutes an extension of the general database on humanitarian law, it is possible to compare national measures adopted by States and the relevant provisions of humanitarian law. The ICRC aims to make all the data globally accessible through modern information technology. However, a vast amount of work is required to gather, analyse and update the information. Since July 1999, the ICRC has made available a new CD-ROM on humanitarian law which, for the first time, includes the national implementation measures of some 20 countries. This information can also be obtained through the ICRC website (www.icrc.org).

13. In an effort to secure the guarantees accorded to the victims of armed conflict, Article 90 of the First Additional Protocol to the 1949 Geneva Conventions provides for the creation of an International Fact-finding Commission. The Commission declared that it would be competent to investigate violations of humanitarian law occurring in non-international armed conflicts, provided that all involved parties consented to its enquiry. However, notwithstanding the commission's great potential and the quality of its membership, it has not been called upon to exercise its responsibilities since its establishment in 1991. As of 15 July 1999, only 55 States party to Additional Protocol I had recognised its competence. States should re-examine the possibility to accept the Commission's competence, and parties to an armed conflict should examine systematically the utility and feasibility of resorting to the Commission in order to clarify facts or facilitate respect for humanitarian law through its good offices, including in situations of non-international armed conflicts.

Final Goal 1.4.
Integration, by all States, of international humanitarian law in the procedures and training of armed and security forces and its promotion to relevant organisations, professional bodies and educational institutions.

14. Today, when numerous international or internal armed conflicts are marked by the "privatisation" of wars and frequent overlapping between military hostilities and criminality, it is more than ever important to promote respect for humanitarian law and the principles on which it is based.

By becoming party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and to their 1977 Additional Protocols, States have engaged themselves to respect and to ensure respect for humanitarian law and to spread knowledge of its provisions. Accordingly, they bear the primary responsibility for raising awareness of its rules, particularly among their armed forces and all those who may be called upon to implement them.

This obligation has become especially significant since the creation of the international tribunals for the repression of war crimes in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda, and even more so with the adoption in Rome on 17 July 1998 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court.

But spreading knowledge of humanitarian law and promoting its respect is also an essential mandate given to the ICRC and the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement in general. Their role is to contribute as supporters and catalysts for this action.

15. Experience shows that after the outbreak of an armed conflict, it is generally too late to teach armed and security forces to respect humanitarian law. Operational priorities monopolise their attention, and procedures, regulations and behaviour need time and attention to be modified.

Knowledge and respect of humanitarian law by armed and security forces is not enough, however, if society at large and major decision-makers are not also sensitised to these issues and if there is no political commitment and an environment conducive to respect for humanitarian law.

Present-day conflicts reveal a series of trends that pose new challenges in terms of conduct of hostilities, respect of humanitarian law and humanitarian action. These are, for instance:

an increasing number and the growing role of non-regular arm-bearers;
the presence of child soldiers;
the high illiteracy rate among fighters and the influence of drugs and alcohol;
a mixture of criminal or Mafia-related groups, but also private militias and security firms;
the increasing number of conflicts where humanitarian actors have no access to victims;
attacks on humanitarian actors; and
the involvement of armies in "military-humanitarian" operations that challenge the concept of impartial and independent humanitarian action.

Existing strategies consist of promoting the integration of humanitarian law into education and training standards of both military and security forces and its incorporation into operating procedures. The ICRC provides guidelines and pedagogical support material to relevant institutions and offers select training of trainers.

The same approach is used in civilian institutions such as universities, where humanitarian law should be taught and researched at least in the faculties of law and international relations, journalism and medicine.

School programmes, developed by the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, are used in civic education lessons or in other subjects where themes such as respect for the rule of law and solidarity with victims and protection of human dignity can be tackled. The purpose of these programmes is to provide young people with basic standards of reference that enable them to form an opinion on humanitarian and social problems. In this respect, the translation and adaptation of standard material to specific local contexts have been facilitated by the network of National Societies and ICRC regional and operational delegations around the world.

The ICRC and National Societies have also developed approaches and products aimed specifically at irregular actors in war areas, at increasing their security and acceptance and reminding them of the basic rules of humanitarian law. These creative programmes, expressly adapted to a local context, will need to be supported by a stronger universal conceptual background and standard tools as their importance increases.
Finally, a number of broad-based information campaigns have targeted the general public. These campaigns are encouraged world-wide as part of the Movement's efforts to increase knowledge and respect for humanitarian law.

16. More than ever, promotion of humanitarian law will mean refining analyses and carefully observing trends to reorient strategies and methods. Critical review of performance achieved through the identification of best practices and definition of professional standards is another major trend.

It is important to ensure that target groups include the key actors in all ongoing conflicts: regional powers and all countries involved in conflicts, armed forces engaged in peace-keeping or enforcement operations, etc. Additionally, irregular and private actors will particularly be targeted for their growing and often controversial involvement in present-day conflicts.

The Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement will also strengthen its commitment to promote the teaching of humanitarian law and its principles in schools, universities and other relevant educational structures, such as youth organisations.

As the task becomes more complex, the Movement will seek more alliances in the future with other specialised institutions to multiply impact and acquire specialised skills.

States should contribute to this approach by enhancing their own commitment to promoting humanitarian law, and by facilitating and supporting the work of their National Society and the ICRC in this field.

The Movement is convinced that States should actively:

assess the level of humanitarian law integration into military and police procedures and their operational capacity to apply them;
review the teaching of humanitarian law in universities and in the training of relevant civil servants and diplomats; and
identify topics such as the basic messages of humanitarian law and solidarity with victims in the curricula of schools and youth organisations.

The Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement will, for its part, provide advice and guidelines, tools and specific programmes for these different target populations. Moreover, it will find new approaches for exploiting ideas contained in the Fundamental Principles of Red Cross and Red Crescent action.

Finally, States should adopt a national plan of action to improve these efforts and facilitate and support the contributions of the Movement where needed.

Final Goal 1.5.
An end to the human tragedy caused by landmines and the establishment of effective controls on the availability of arms and ammunition.

17. When the First Review Conference of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) was suspended just prior to the 26th International Conference in 1995 there was faint hope that a ban on anti-personnel mines would be achieved rapidly. The fact that 123 States signed a comprehensive ban on this weapon just two years later is a lasting testimony to the power of humanity. The Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement played an instrumental role in this achievement and continues to have an important role in promoting the new humanitarian law treaties on landmines and ensuring that victims receive the care they need.

While the Review Conference strengthened Protocol II of the CCW, dealing with all mines, booby traps and other devices, by providing greater restrictions on the use of anti-personnel mines, public opinion and many States felt that the modest improvements concerning anti-personnel mines were an inadequate response to the scale of suffering these weapons were causing world-wide.

The result was the "Ottawa Process" through which Canada invited all States committed to the prohibition of anti-personnel mines to join it in drawing up a treaty which would do so. This unique process, which brought together pro-ban governments, the International Movement of the Red Cross and Red Crescent, the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the United Nations, achieved extraordinary results. The "Ottawa Group" of States grew from 50 at the first Ottawa Conference in October 1996 to 97 States which committed themselves to pursue negotiation of a binding international treaty at the Brussels International Conference for a Global Ban on Anti-Personnel Mines in June 1997.

Even beyond the "Ottawa Process" political support for a ban grew rapidly. In December 1996, 157 States voted in favour of a UN General Assembly Resolution (A/51/45S) which called upon all countries to conclude a new international agreement totally prohibiting anti-personnel mines "as soon as possible". No State voted against the resolution, and only 10 abstained.

Based upon a draft prepared by the Austrian Government, negotiations took place in Oslo, Norway from 1 to 18 September 1997 at the Oslo Diplomatic Conference on an International Total Ban on Anti-Personnel Landmines. Ninety-one States took part as full participants and an additional 38 attended as observers, as did the ICRC, the International Federation, a number of National Societies, the ICBL and the UN. The ICRC contributed, as an expert in humanitarian law, to the treaty drafting process throughout a series of meetings and consultations held in 1997.

The Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (the Ottawa Treaty) was signed by 123 States in Ottawa, Canada in December 1997. On 1 March 1999, following the deposit of 40 instruments of ratification with the UN Secretary-General, the treaty entered into force. Never before had a multilateral arms-related treaty entered into force so quickly. A new international norm had been established and an important step taken towards ridding the world of these weapons. As at 15 July 1999, the number of ratifications had grown to 83 States. The first meeting of States Parties to the Ottawa Treaty was held in Maputo, Mozambique from 3 to 7 May 1999. This meeting focused on the ambitious tasks entailed in the treaty's implementation and was attended by 107 States, the ICRC and non-governmental organisations - many of which will be instrumental in the Treaty's implementation in mine-affected communities. The meeting launched an ongoing process of working meetings through which States, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGO's will work together to ensure that the treaty's commitments become a reality on the ground. Indeed the Red Cross Movement is specifically identified as one of the channels for the provision of assistance to mine victims under Article 6 of the Ottawa Treaty.

The adoption and rapid entry into force of the Ottawa Treaty are historic achievements. However, it is essential to recall that while the Treaty itself is a prescription for ending the global scourge of anti-personnel mines, its universalisation and full implementation will be the cure. The International Movement of the Red Cross and Red Crescent continues to have a crucial role to play in this process.

Promotion of the norms of both the Ottawa Treaty and Protocol II of the CCW (as well as its Protocol IV on blinding laser weapons) remain essential. In this regard the ICRC has prepared ratification kits for each instrument which have been widely used by National Societies and ICRC delegations. Between 1997 and 1999, the ICRC hosted and provided substantial support for regional conferences in Harare, Manila, Johannesburg, Budapest, Moscow, Dhaka, Mexico City and Beirut. To promote greater understanding of the Ottawa Treaty, the ICRC has produced both a teaching video and a travelling exhibition in several languages explaining its provisions. These are available for public events throughout the world. Strengthened restrictions on the use of anti-vehicle mines are also needed and will be promoted by the ICRC in the period leading up to the 2001 Review Conference of the CCW.

The Movement has a particular responsibility both to promote and to provide medical assistance and rehabilitative care to mine victims and other war-wounded. Surgical assistance and physical rehabilitation programs have been provided or supported by the ICRC, often in co-operation with National Societies, in some 22 mine-affected countries; two new rehabilitation centres have opened in Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. In addition, the ICRC and/or National Societies are currently running mine awareness programmes in Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Georgia, Mozambique, Sudan and Yugoslavia. In some contexts mine awareness delegates are National Society staff seconded to the ICRC while in others the ICRC is working closely with the National Society to develop a local capacity in this area; some Societies run programs independently. The ICRC considers mine awareness work to be an integral part of its work for the protection of civilian populations.

To ensure a coherent long-term contribution to eradicating the scourge of landmines a comprehensive "Movement Strategy on Landmines" - identifying the roles and responsibilities of the ICRC, National Societies and the International Federation in terms of advocacy, mine awareness and victim assistance - is to be adopted by the Movement's Council of Delegates in October 1999. It outlines the need for close co-operation to ensure that these activities are carried out in an effective and sustainable manner and identifies the components of the Movement responsible for achieving this.

18. States have an obligation to review the legality of weapons they intend to use. This principle, as it applies to new weapons, is enshrined in Article 36 of Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. One reason that a weapon might be deemed illegal is that it causes "superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering." The SIrUS Project (Superfluous Injury or Unncessary Suffering) is an attempt to bring objectivity to the legal notion of "superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering" and so aims to facilitate the review of the legality of weapons.

Since 1868 the principle that the only legitimate purpose of war is to weaken the military forces of an opponent has been an accepted element of humanitarian law .[1] At that time it was established that this purpose would be served by disabling enemy combatants and that it would "be exceeded by the employment of arms which uselessly aggravate the sufferings of disabled men, or render their death inevitable".[2] This principle has been reaffirmed in various international instruments in the form of a prohibition on the use of "weapons, projectiles and material and methods of war of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering".[3] In 1996 the International Court of Justice stated that this rule constitutes one of the "intransgressible principles of international customary law and is a fundamental rule to be observed by all States".[4]

Despite the firmly established nature of this prohibition, its application has often been difficult or has not even been attempted due to the difficulty for lawyers, weapon designers and political leaders to make determinations of the degree of human injury or suffering inflicted. Judgements as to whether a specific weapon causes superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering have most often been made primarily on the basis of subjective influences, often led by generalised public abhorrence of a particular weapon, rather than on an appraisal of whether the weapon's effects might outweigh the military need.

The notion of 'superfluous injury and unnecessary suffering [5] relates to the design-dependent effects of specific weapons on health. Indeed the prohibition refers to weapons of a nature to cause [6] these effects. Although much of humanitarian law is aimed at protecting civilians from the effects of armed conflict this rule of customary international law constitutes one of the few measures intended to protect combatants from certain weapons which are deemed abhorrent or which inflict more suffering than required for their military purpose.

The SIrUS Project grew out of a symposium organised by the ICRC in 1996 on "The Medical Profession and the Effects of Weapons". The Project has been developed by a group of experts at the invitation of the ICRC and identifies objective facts about injuries from weapons in the conflicts of recent decades; these facts could assist policy-makers in making judgements on the legality of weapons under humanitarian law.[7] The Project takes its name from that which it seeks to prevent: Superfluous Injury or Unnecessary Suffering (= SIrUS).

The SIrUS Project has been endorsed by a growing number of the international medical community. In October 1998 the World Medical Association called on all its member national medical associations to endorse the criteria contained in the SIrUS Project. Thirteen national medical associations and 16 other medical institutions had endorsed the SIrUS Project as of April 1999. By endorsing the SIrUS Project, these institutions recognise the validity of the study and recommend that the findings be used when making a determination of which weapons cause 'superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering'.

The SIrUS Project: a study of the effects of weapons.

The group of experts who worked on the SIrUS Project, most of whom were health professionals, collated data relating to the effects of weapons used in conflicts over the last 50 years. These data originated from both military medical publications and the ICRC wound database of 26,636 weapon injured. In relation to different causes of injury the following information was retrieved:

the proportion of large wounds (according to the Red Cross wound classification),
overall mortality,
the relative proportions of central and limb injuries,
the duration of hospital stay,
the number of operations required,
the need for and volume of blood transfusion,
the number of lower limbs amputated among the survivors.

From these data, the expert's group found that the measurable effects of weapons which cause injury by explosions or projectiles but which do not target a specific part of the body as a function of their design:

do not cause a field mortality of more than 22% nor a hospital mortality of more than 5%;
cause grade 3 wounds (as measured by the Red Cross wound classification) in less than 10% of those who survive to hospital; and
can be treated for the most part by well established medical and surgical methods.

High mortality or large wounds can obviously be caused by legitimate weapons such as rifle bullets and fragmentation munitions under certain circumstances. Whether an individual is wounded slightly, wounded severely or killed by such weapons is determined by 1) the design of a weapon, 2) how it is used and 3) random factors such as his or her proximity to the detonation (of a munition) and the part of the body that is hit. The data in the SIrUS Project about the effects of weapons commonly used in recent conflicts take all these factors into account.

On the other hand, some weapons can be expected to inflict certain effects virtually all the time. These effects result specifically from the nature or technology of the weapon i.e., they are design-dependent. Examples include: exploding bullets which would usually be lethal or cause grade 3 limb wounds; chemical and biological weapons which inflict specific disease or abnormal physiological states; blinding laser weapons which cause specific permanent disability to the eyes and effects for which there is no proven medical treatment; and "point-detonated" antipersonnel mines which result in a severe (grade 3) injury to the foot or leg which in turn results in specific disability and disfigurement .

All weapons, the use of which is specifically controlled or prohibited under humanitarian law, exceed the baseline of weapon injuries seen in recent conflicts, as described by the SIrUS Project. Had such an approach existed when the problems related to these weapons were being discussed their control or prohibition might have occurred through a more rational and efficient process. Subsequently, consensus on and universalisation of the relevant rules might also have been achieved more rapidly.

Proposals of the ICRC based on the SIrUS Project.

The SIrUS Project has established that the following effects of weapons on humans have NOT been seen commonly as a result of armed conflicts in the last five decades:

disease other than that resulting from physical trauma from explosions or projectiles;
abnormal physiological state or abnormal psychological state (other than the expected response to trauma from explosions or projectiles);
permanent disability specific to the kind of weapon (with the exception of the effects of point-detonated antipersonnel mines - now widely prohibited);
disfigurement specific to the kind of weapon;
inevitable or virtually inevitable death in the field or a high hospital mortality level;
grade 3 wounds among those who survive to hospital;
effects for which there is no wellrecognised and proven medical treatment which can be applied in a well-equipped field hospital.

Proposal 1

That States, when reviewing the legality of a weapon take the above facts into account by:

establishing whether the weapon in question would cause any of the above effects as a function of its design and if so;
weighing the military utility of the weapon against these effects; and
determining whether the same purpose could reasonably be achieved by other lawful means that do not have such effects.

Proposal 2

That States make new efforts a) to build common understanding of the norms to be applied in the review of new weapons and b) to promote transparency in the conduct and results of such reviews.

These proposals have been made after taking into account comments on the SIrUS Project from a group of governmental legal and medical experts invited to Geneva on 10-11 May 1999.

Weapons, law and health.

The ICRC's work relating to chemical and biological weapons early in this century and its more recent work on landmines and blinding laser weapons was driven by its concern with their horrific effects on health. The whole body of humanitarian law is based on concern with the effects of certain weapons rather than their specific technologies which cause these effects. The ICRC's support for the SIrUS Project reflects the institution's commitment to a health-based approach to weapons under humanitarian law.

The ICRC considers that the data provided by the SIrUS Project constitutes a tool for making judgements as to which weapons may be deemed abhorrent or to be of a nature to cause 'superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering'. These data do not and will not provide a definition of these concepts.

Use of the findings of the SIrUS Project in weapon reviews would not prevent governments from prohibiting weapons, by treaty, on the basis of other considerations such as public abhorrence, public interest criteria or the specific effects of a weapon. The proposals would have no effect on existing treaties.

Plan of action.

The ICRC presents the SIrUS Project and the above proposals to States, the medical community and concerned organisations and individuals as a means of promoting both debate and consensus on a health-based approach to arms under humanitarian law. In so doing the ICRC invites:

States to analyse the approach proposed in this paper and to take the available data [8] concerning the nature of injury in recent conflicts into account when determining, as called for under Article 36 of 1977 Additional Protocol I, whether a proposed weapon, by its design, causes effects on health which may constitute 'superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering'.
States to make new efforts a) to build common understanding of the norms to be applied in the review of new weapons and b) to promote transparency in the conduct and results of such reviews.
States, National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and other interested organisations to support the approach taken by the SIrUS Project in their efforts to strengthen respect for the prohibition of weapons which are inherently abhorrent or of a nature to cause 'superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering': Such efforts may include public discussion and fora such as the 27th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (1999) and the 2001 Review Conference of the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.
National medical associations to consider the contribution medical professionals can make to promoting effective implementation of humanitarian law through discussion and endorsement of the SIrUS Project.
Medical professionals and other individuals concerned with the effects of weapons and armed conflict to promote a health-based approach, including consideration of the SIrUS Project, in professional and public discourse on these issues.

19. As international arms transfers, particularly of small arms, have become easier the promotion of respect for humanitarian law has become vastly more difficult. The proliferation of weapons in the hands of new and often undisciplined actors has outpaced efforts to ensure compliance with basic rules of warfare. The result is appalling levels of wanton violence and a stream of horrific images which threaten to immunise the public and decision-makers to ongoing violations of humanitarian law. In the absence of vigorous action to restrain the availability of military-style arms and ammunition, those responsible for training combatants in the laws of armed conflict have little hope of reaching all those capable of waging war. The price to be paid is high, in terms of human suffering, social and economic disruption and the burdens of intervention when the international community decides to act.

In recognition of these trends, the Intergovernmental Group of Experts for the Protection of War Victims (January 1995) and the 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent called upon the ICRC "to examine, on the basis of first-hand information available to it, the extent to which the availability of weapons is contributing to the proliferation and aggravation of violations of international humanitarian law in armed conflicts and the deterioration of the situation of civilians". The Council of Delegates has also, on two recent occasions, requested that the Movement's role and attitude on the question of arms transfers be studied and clarified. This request was made in Geneva in 1995 (resolution 2.8) and repeated in Seville in 1997 (resolution 4.3). The Seville resolution also expressed concern about the "easy access of combatants and civilian populations unfamiliar with the requirements of international humanitarian law to a wide variety of weapons, particularly small arms, and their frequent use against civilians in violation of basic humanitarian principles". The role and position of the Movement on this issue is to be clarified at the Council of Delegates in October 1999, just prior to the 27th International Conference.

In fulfilment of its mandate from the 26th International Conference the ICRC has, since 1996, attempted to distil its experience on the effects of arms availability on civilian populations through a variety of methods. It has carried out two case studies analysing information drawn from the ICRC's large medical database on patients treated in ICRC hospitals and by its medical teams. These provide unique insights into the nature of arms-related casualties in two contexts in which the ICRC has worked. To our knowledge, these are among the few systematic studies which have been published on the nature of arms-related casualties among the local population in war-torn societies.

In addition, a survey was carried out among senior ICRC delegates with a collective experience of 41 assignments in conflict and post-conflict settings on four continents since 1989. The objective was to gather the perceptions of ICRC staff on the degree of availability within various segments of given populations, the nature of arms-related incidents involving civilians and the direct impact of arms availability on ICRC field operations. The perceptions and conclusions of the ICRC are published in the study Arms Availability and the Situation of Civilians in Armed Conflict which is being transmitted to States and National Societies as a basis for discussion at the 27th International Conference.

The ICRC study highlights the high price civilian populations have paid in recent conflicts. Civilian casualties outnumber those of combatants in many internal and ethnic conflicts and have increased throughout the century in parallel with the development of new military technologies. Disease, starvation and abuse increase when humanitarian agencies including the ICRC are directly attacked and must suspend operations or leave a country. Suffering can continue, often for years after the end of conflicts, as the availability of arms engenders a "culture of violence", undermining the rule of law and threatening efforts at reconciliation among former warring parties. This was vividly illustrated in an ICRC case study which showed that arms-related casualties decreased by only 33% during the 18 months following the end of hostilities in a given region where arms were allowed to remain in circulation.

Although the ICRC study does not suggest that arms availability alone is a cause of violations of humanitarian law or a deterioration of the situation of civilians, it indicates that the unregulated transfer of weapons and ammunition can increase tensions, heighten civilian casualties and prolong the duration of conflicts. Among the central conclusions is that the current pattern of transfers of small arms, light weapons and related ammunition, because it is largely outside of international control, should be a matter of urgent humanitarian concern. While the primary responsibility for compliance with humanitarian law falls upon users of weapons, States and enterprises engaged in production and export bear a degree of political, moral and, in some cases, legal responsibility to the international community for the use made of their weapons and ammunition. At the same time efforts to teach and promote humanitarian law must be redoubled so that arms bearers understand its basic norms and are expected by their own communities to respect it.

The international community has in recent decades enacted important prohibitions and limitations on the transfer of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, missile systems and components of these technologies. Certain geographical regions have established controls on the transfer of major conventional weapon systems. However, until recently little attention has been given to the transfer of small arms and light weapons, which have inflicted most of the death and injury in recent conflicts. The ICRC study encourages governments, regional organisations and non-governmental organisations involved in the development of arms transfer limitations to recognise that humanitarian law is often the body of law most relevant to the stated purpose for which military-style arms and ammunition are transferred. The proposal that criteria based on humanitarian law considerations should become an important component of any new limitations on arms availability developed in the coming years will be an important point of discussion at the 27th International Conference.

The ICRC considers that, in requiring respect for humanitarian law from those who would arm themselves, States will make a major contribution to the protection of civilian populations from the type of unspeakable suffering which has been inflicted in conflicts throughout this century. In so doing they will significantly strengthen the basis for both lasting peace and the rule of law in the increasingly global society in which we live.

2. HUMANITARIAN ACTION IN TIMES OF ARMED CONFLICT AND OTHER DISASTERS

Final Goal 2.1.
Effective response in disaster situations through improved national and international preparedness

1&2 The importance of States ensuring that their countries have up-to-date and comprehensive disaster preparedness plans needs little introduction. All countries may be struck by disasters of one form or another, and it is vital that national contingency plans are drawn up so that an adequate response can be made to cope with the humanitarian consequences arising from such events.

Disaster types will vary according to the geographic situation of the country. Cyclones, earthquakes and droughts, for example, are usually region specific, even if the timing of their occurrence may be less unpredictable. In today's world, technological disasters and major accidents can strike any country in the world, and recent trends in weather patterns have shown that extreme flooding can affect the most unlikely areas within and between countries. Furthermore, political tensions and civil unrest are phenomena that can affect countries in the North and South alike.

However, a good disaster preparedness plan should not be judged by its ability to forecast likely disaster events alone. Another prime requirement is that the plan should outline the roles of the main actors in responding to the disasters foreseen in the national context. This would include the main emergency and assistance bodies of the government, but also the National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society. Disaster response is one of the core functions of National Societies and, in most countries, they have a long and creditable track record of providing disaster assistance. Their structures usually cover the whole country from the national to the grass-root levels. Their branches and volunteer network especially in remote and/or high-risk areas, constitute the first preparedness/response "defence" line. This can be particularly crucial in situations where governments may have a weak service-delivery infrastructure at the local level.

Their network and infrastructure is not only important for the Movement and governments but also for the international humanitarian system as a whole. The existence of a well-functioning local organisation is of potential benefit to UN and other international bodies which are looking for effective ways to channel their assistance to disaster victims, especially in remote areas. While being mindful to protect their own independence of action in some sensitive cases, there are numerous examples of National Societies fulfilling this role both in the emergency and follow-up phases of relief operations.

Another significant advantage of National Societies being closely associated with national disaster preparedness plans is the ready access they have to additional support at the international level. In times of disaster, both the International Federation and the ICRC stand ready to mobilise international assistance to come to the aid of the stricken country and support the National Society in its task of implementing relief operations. This assistance can take a variety of forms depending on the nature of the disaster, but societies in the North have extensive experience in mobilising material, financial and human resources very quickly in the immediate aftermath of major disasters. Furthermore, with their global experience in disaster preparedness and response, both institutions carry out programmes designed to provide co-ordinated technical support, experience and expertise to assist many National Societies. In addition, the International Federation also works to support governments in their disaster preparedness planning and training activities.

It has to be recognised that in many cases today the limited resources available to Societies can mean that they face problems in maintaining their preparedness capacities and responding in the most effective manner. Not only are national resources in these countries scarce, but also by international criteria, preparedness often falls between the budget lines of relief and development. Good preparedness needs to be seen also as the result of a consistent effort to build and maintain the society's programme and organisational capacity, and to seek ways to contribute most appropriately to the overall governmental preparedness efforts. Disaster preparedness programmes therefore deserve to be considered for government funding, both in the context of disaster response and sustainable development.

With this in mind, the International Federation has intensified efforts to lobby for the inclusion of disaster preparedness into international co-operation frameworks such as the Lomé Convention. This convention which is the legal framework covering trade and development between the European Union (EU) and 71 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries is currently being renegotiated. It also governs relations in areas like emergency assistance, rehabilitation and refugee assistance which are of concern to the Red Cross/Red Crescent. In the current convention, disaster preparedness is hardly mentioned, and the International Federation and National Societies in EU and ACP countries have been lobbying the EU Commission and national governments to give appropriate attention to disaster preparedness in the future convention. Further support from both EU and ACP governments will be needed to ensure that disaster preparedness is given proper attention in the new convention.

National disaster preparedness plans can serve as a key entry point for establishing and reinforcing relations between a National Society and its government. Beyond the general points made above, there are several practical mutual benefits to linking National Societies to the governmental disaster preparedness plans. These include:

giving the National Society, and its International Federation and ICRC partners, a clear formal status and a mandate to act, according to capacities, knowledge, expertise and experience;
the National Society will be able to play a stronger role in disaster preparedness and response co-ordination mechanisms set up at the national level, and will be able to bring its experience and expertise to strengthen such mechanisms;
a well-formulated disaster preparedness plan can be used as an effective fund-raising tool to mobilise support for the national programme; and
above all, it will facilitate, speed up and improve the response process.

Based on the roles and responsibilities given by its government, the National Society will in turn translate such co-operation into its own preparedness plan, spelling out the society's approach, focus and programmes to build its capacity in order to improve response.
Today, business continuity provides an extra dimension to disaster preparedness. The business community, governments and humanitarian agencies have all become more aware of the importance of ensuring their own ability to continue operations following a disaster. A "disaster" here may be a major "external" event such as a flood, a conflict or a failure of power supply, or it may be "internal" such as a localised fire, or a failure of computer systems.

Business continuity is of particular importance to those sections of government, the Red Cross/Red Crescent and other humanitarian agencies which aim to provide assistance in case of disaster. A disaster agency itself disabled by disaster cannot presume to assist others efficiently. To be able to do so, they must ensure that their preparedness includes business continuity planning for their own critical systems. This has implications for design and maintenance of physical assets, computer and other systems and personnel planning.

Exploration of this area by the International Federation with a coalition of business, government, the UN's International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) and voluntary agencies has highlighted the importance and potential benefit of co-operation in disaster preparedness between public and private sectors. Indeed, the recovery of each sector depends to a significant extent on the action of the other. Thus, the business sector can provide advice and support on its business continuity experience as well as resources for disaster response. However, the rapid recovery of the business sector after a disaster itself depends on the complementary action of government and humanitarian agencies to assist the families of its employees affected by disaster to enable employees to return to work. This recovery of the business community is a significant factor in supporting the economic recovery of the wider community.

3. Predictions within the scientific and reinsurance communities, based upon the respected work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, suggest that disasters triggered by natural phenomena will significantly increase in number and severity over the next decade. With almost a billion people living in unplanned urban shanty towns, deforestation seriously weakening ecological defences against extreme natural events, and global warming making such extreme events more frequent but harder to predict, humankind is increasingly threatened by, and is in turn altering, the forces of nature.

Global warming is already credited with generating stronger storms and rainfall in many coastal areas. Compared to the 1960s, the past decade has seen the number of significant natural catastrophes triple, costing the world's economies nine times as much.

Response data from the International Federation for the 1990s support concerns over an increasing threat from natural disasters. In 1998, the International Federation assisted some 5.8 million people caught up in so-called natural disasters. In 1997, the figure was 6.2 million, almost double the average for the preceding years, representing a significant increase of the proportion of the average 16.4 million people the International Federation has assisted annually.

In response to this threat, the Movement believes it must adjust both its disaster preparedness and response systems accordingly. National Societies need to advocate for, and participate in, better co-ordinated national disaster preparedness planning. Response systems to natural disasters need to be able to operate both at the local level within a National Society and at the international level, enabling a society to quickly call for assistance from the International Federation.

Many of the general predictions on climate and environment change have still to be properly examined from the perspective of their potential consequences on disaster occurrence and impact, particularly when it comes to differentiating these consequences region by region. As part of its ongoing programme of disaster preparedness, the International Federation therefore proposes to foster a debate within the international community, in collaboration with leading climatic and environmental institutions, on the potential consequences of climatic change on disaster patterns and the implications of these consequences for disaster preparedness and response systems.

Final Goal 2.2.
Strengthened mechanisms of co-operation and co-ordination amongst States, the Movement and other humanitarian actors

4. The Council of Delegates held in Seville in November 1997, adopted an Agreement on the Organisation of the International Activities of the Components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The agreement aims to foster a spirit of co-operation based upon shared principles and a commitment to the alleviation of suffering and the protection of war and disaster victims.

In 1998, the agreement was put to the test. Two devastating earthquakes hit north-east Afghanistan four months apart in 1998. Under the Seville Agreement, ICRC was recognised as the "lead agency" within the Movement for these operations, with the International Federation providing its expertise in natural disaster response and National Society development. This co-ordinated action was an important part of the implementation of the agreement, allowing ICRC to take advantage of the International Federation's expertise, while retaining the overall co-ordination of relief efforts in a conflict situation.

A few months later, in Central America, the roles were reversed with the International Federation playing its role as lead agency in response to Hurricane Mitch.

This year with the Movement’s response to the Balkan crisis in April, the implementation of the agreement has gone a stage further with an integrated Movement appeal being put in place allowing National Societies, the International Federation and ICRC operations to be better co-ordinated and to act in mutual support of each other. It is, however, too early to draw definitive lessons from this operation.

Whilst the Seville Agreement is a co-operation mechanism internal to the Movement, it demonstrates how it is possible to both capitalise upon the diversity of the humanitarian community by co-ordinating activities appropriately to improve the service to disaster and conflict victims.

Similar initiatives are possible within the wider response community, whether at the national level through effective national disaster preparedness planning or internationally through agreement on operating norms and principles and the timely sharing of information and analysis. The Movement has the possibility to foster better co-operation within both national and international humanitarian response communities and looks to both its internal components and States to help it promote better humanitarian co-operation.

5. Building on the experiences of formulating the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and NGOs in disaster relief and the expressed wish from many agencies to see a clearer formulation of the practical implications of the Code, the International Federation, with the co-operation of the Steering Committee for Humanitarian Response, InterAction, the ICRC, the International Council for Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) and VOICE set out, in 1997, to collectively draw together a set of minimum standards to guide operational humanitarian work. The resulting product, the Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response (printed in December 1998 by the Sphere Project), aims to tackle system-wide problems in protecting the life and dignity of disaster-affected people by providing a framework for rights-based humanitarian assistance and accountability. Over 200 agencies (governmental, UN agencies and programmes, components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, NGOs) have collaborated to improve practices based on agreed core principles and actions.

The Sphere Project, which continues to develop, aims to link humanitarian principles and basic human rights with minimum standards in water supply and sanitation, nutrition, food aid, shelter and site planning, and health services.

The elaboration, through the Sphere Project or similar initiatives, of standards for humanitarian norms is premised on the assumption that access to the victims, security and availability of resources for humanitarian assistance are limiting factors whose control lies primarily with states. In this regard, the setting of such minimum standards or their recognition by governments can never relieve these governments of their obligations under international humanitarian law.

The Movement is looking to States to support efforts to develop minimum standards for the delivery of humanitarian assistance and take note of the standards developed in the Sphere Project.

6. The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement has consistently sought to develop appropriate mechanisms and activities to meet the evolving needs arising from conflict.

The 1949 Geneva Conventions have provisions aimed at protecting victims of war even after active hostilities end. The ICRC is engaged in a wide range of activities such as working for the release and repatriation of prisoners of war and civilian detainees, tracing people who have disappeared and reuniting families separated by conflict, returning displaced people to their homes, and contributing to the demobilisation and resettlement of armed forces. Dissemination of international humanitarian law and humanitarian principles do not cease when hostilities come to an end; educational activities in these fields can, and must, build or strengthen the foundation for lasting peace.

Many National Societies are actively involved in programmes which fall within the rubric of conflict reduction and post-conflict rehabilitation and reconstruction, such as:

Peace-building (strengthening civil society): Ranging from development programmes which enhance National Society capacity to function more effectively as a community-based – i.e., civil society – organisation, to service delivery programmes which focus on deprived people from specific socio-economic categories or ethnic backgrounds, to the provision of basic public health services.

Reconciliation and tolerance: National Society development programmes and post-conflict rehabilitation programmes involve the reinforcement of a nation-wide network of branches. This, in turn, requires a continued commitment to reconciliation and tolerance of diversity within society. This active and daily practical demonstration of the values of tolerance and reconciliation acts as a living example of the potential for reconciliation in post-conflict situations.

As lead agency for the Movement in post-conflict relief and rehabilitation programming, the International Federation plays a special role in support of National Societies in post-conflict situations. In this regard, the International Federation has initiated a programme of action-research within the framework of the Local Capacities for Peace Project (LCPP), a collaborative action with other humanitarian agencies, research bodies and donor governments. The project seeks to find practical ways in which programming in post-conflict, but still potentially unstable, situations can be adjusted to minimise the chances of inadvertently leading to violence whilst maximising the support given to those institutions and systems which promote normalcy.

In addition, in the context of post-conflict situations in Africa, National Societies, in collaboration with the International Federation, seek to better understand and define their role in rebuilding public health systems and knowledge appropriate to the post-conflict environment.

7. The 26th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (Geneva 1995) welcomed the updated and revised Principles and Rules for Disaster Relief which provide the framework for co-ordinating the work of National Societies during international relief operations as well as the Code of Conduct fo