Source: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_cha_chapter1_rule4
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 09:08:48+00:00

Document:
4) To conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
In countries where militia or volunteer corps constitute the army, or form part of it, they are included under the denomination “army”.
Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, annexed to Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 29 July 1899, Article 1.
Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land, annexed to Convention (IV) respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, The Hague, 18 October 1907, Article 1.
1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 4(A).
The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), Geneva, 8 June 1977, Article 43(1). Article 43 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.39, 25 May 1977, p. 111.
shall apply to all armed conflicts … which take place in the territory of a High Contracting Party between its armed forces and dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups which, under responsible command, exercise such control over a part of its territory as to enable them to carry out sustained and concerted military operations and to implement this Protocol.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), Geneva, 8 June 1977, Article 1(1). Article 1 was adopted by 58 votes in favour, 5 against and 29 abstentions. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VII, CDDH/SR.49, 2 June 1977, pp. 69–70.
4) that they conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
In countries where militia constitute the army, or form part of it, they are included under the denomination “army”.
Project of an International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War, Brussels, 27 August 1874, Article 9.
(c) That they carry arms openly.
3. The crews of men-of-war and other military boats.
The Laws of War on Land, adopted by the Institute of International Law, Oxford, 9 September 1880, Article 2.
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) defines the armed forces of a party to the conflict as “all organised armed forces, groups and units … which are under the command of a party to a conflict and are subject to an internal disciplinary system which enforces compliance with LOAC”.
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 512; see also Law of Armed Conflict, Commanders’ Guide, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 Supplement 1 – Interim Edition, 7 March 1994, Glossary, p. xxi.
Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) defines the armed forces of a party to the conflict as “all organised armed forces, groups and units … which are under the command of a party to a conflict and are subject to an internal disciplinary system, which enforces compliance with the LOAC”.
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 5.12.
d) comply with the laws and customs of war.
Belgium, Droit Pénal et Disciplinaire Militaire et Droit de la Guerre, Deuxième Partie, Droit de la Guerre, Ecole Royale Militaire, par J. Maes, Chargé de cours, Avocat-général près la Cour Militaire, D/1983/1187/029, 1983, p. 20.
It is prohibited to consider members of the armed forces or volunteer militias, including organized resistance movements, as “regular combatants” unless they are under a responsible command, wear a distinctive sign, carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
Burkina Faso, Règlement de discipline générale dans les Forces Armées, Décret No. 94-159/IPRES/DEF, Ministère de la Défense, 1994, Article 35(1).
Members of the Armed Forces in organized units, francs-tireurs detached from their regular units, commando detachments and isolated saboteurs, as well as voluntary militias, self-defence groups and organized resistance formations are lawful combatants on condition that those units, organizations or formations have a designated commander, that their members wear a distinctive sign, notably on their clothing, that they carry arms openly and that they respect the laws and customs of war.
- The physical engagement of different forces. These forces are characterized by the existence of a recognizable commander, the wearing of a uniform or the open carrying of arms and respect for a strict [military] discipline.
Cameroon, Droit des conflits armés et droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces de défense, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 95, § 352.31; see also p. 137, § 412.29.
Members of armed forces in organized units, franc-tireurs detached from regular units, commando detachments and isolated saboteurs, as well as the members of voluntary militias, self-defence groups and organized resistance formations, are lawful combatants.
It is sufficient that those units, organizations or formations have a designated commander, that their members wear a distinctive sign, notably on their clothing, that they carry their arms openly and that they respect the laws and customs of war.
Armed forces of a party to the conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units that are under a command responsible to that party for the conduct of its subordinates … Armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system, one purpose of which is to enforce compliance with the LOAC.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 3-1, §§ 7–8.
10. In some cases, a party to a conflict may have armed groups fighting on its behalf that are not part of its armed forces. Such groups may be fighting behind enemy lines or in occupied territory. Partisans and resistance fighters who fought in occupied territory in the Soviet Union and France during World War II are examples of such groups.
d. conduct their operations in accordance with the LOAC.
12. Militias, volunteer corps and organized resistance movements must “belong” to a party to the conflict in the sense that they are acknowledged by that party as fighting on its behalf or in its support.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 3-2, §§ 10–12.
1. Armed forces of a party to the conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units that are under a command responsible to that party for the conduct of its subordinates. In Canada, for example, the armed forces consist of the Regular Force and the Reserve Force.
2. A party to the conflict may be a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse party (for example, Free French Forces raised by the French government-in-exile during World War II). Armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system, one purpose of which is to enforce compliance with the LOAC.
3. Individual members of the armed forces, acting separately from their units, are combatants, even when employing methods of surprise or violent combat, provided they wear an appropriate uniform while so operating.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 304.
1. In some cases, a party to a conflict may have armed groups fighting on its behalf that are not part of its armed forces. Such groups may be fighting behind enemy lines or in occupied territory. Partisans and resistance fighters who fought in occupied territory in the Soviet Union and France during World War II are examples of such groups.
3. Militias, volunteer corps and organized resistance movements must “belong” to a party to the conflict in the sense that they are acknowledged by that party as fighting on its behalf or in its support.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 305.
The armed forces of a State consist of all the forces, all the armed and organized groups and units placed under a commander who is responsible for the conduct of his subordinates with regard to a belligerent. These armed forces must be subject to an internal disciplinary regime and to the law of [armed] conflict.
Chad, Droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces armées et de sécurité, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 55.
Soldiers in combat must not consider members of the armed forces or volunteer militias, including organized resistance movements, as “combatants” unless they are under a responsible command, wear a distinctive sign, carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
Congo, Décret No. 86/057 du 14 janvier 1986 portant Règlement du Service dans l’Armée Populaire Nationale, 1986, Article 32(1).
The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by the adverse Party.
They are subject to an internal disciplinary system which ensures respect for the law of armed conflicts.
Numerous armies have special forces. Generally, they are very specialized units, employed far behind enemy lines for incursions, reconnaissance operations or sabotage missions. They can also be used for internal security tasks, such as combating hostage-taking or terrorism. These units are part of the armed forces in the same way as those described above. During operations, they must be recognizable as combatants, by their uniforms, their insignia. Special forces who operate in civilian attire or dressed in the uniform of the enemy can be punished. Their members nevertheless have the right to a fair trial and must be treated in a manner equivalent to prisoners of war for the whole time of the judicial proceedings.
Côte d’Ivoire, Droit de la guerre, Manuel d’instruction, Livre III, Tome 1: Instruction de l’élève officier d’active de 1ère année, Manuel de l’élève, Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Nationales, November 2007, pp. 27–29; see also Droit de la guerre, Manuel d’instruction, Livre IV: Instruction du chef de section et du commandant de compagnie, Manuel de l’élève, Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Nationales, November 2007, p. 18.
In certain cases, a Party to a conflict can have armed groups which fight on its behalf without forming part of its armed forces. These groups can fight behind the enemy lines or in occupied territory. The partisans and the combatants of the Résistance which fought in occupied territory, in the Soviet Union and in France during World War II, are examples of these groups.
- conduct their operations in accordance with the LOAC.
The militias, volunteer corps and organized resistance movements must “belong” to a Party to a conflict in the sense that they are recognized by that party as combatants on its behalf or in its support.
Côte d’Ivoire, Droit de la guerre, Manuel d’instruction, Livre IV: Instruction du chef de section et du commandant de compagnie, Manuel de l’élève, Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Nationales, November 2007, p. 19.
Croatia’s LOAC Compendium (1991) defines armed forces as “all organized units and personnel under [a] responsible command … [and] subject to [an] internal disciplinary system”.
Croatia, Compendium “Law of Armed Conflicts”, Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, 1991, p. 5; see also p. 6.
Soldiers in combat must not consider members of the armed forces or volunteer militias, including organized resistance movements, as combatants unless they are under a responsible command, wear a distinctive sign, carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
France, Règlement de Discipline Générale dans les Armées, Decree No. 75-675 of 28 July 1975, replacing Decree No. 66-749, completed by Decree of 11 October 1978, implemented by Instruction No. 52000/DEF/C/5 of 10 December 1979, and modified by Decree of 12 July 1982, Ministère de la Défense, Etat-Major de l’Armée de Terre, Bureau Emploi, Article 9 bis (1); see also Manuel de droit des conflits armés, Ministère de la Défense, Direction des Affaires Juridiques, Sous-Direction du droit international humanitaire et du droit européen, Bureau du droit des conflits armés, 2001, pp. 39 and 70–71.
–subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, shall enforce compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
Germany, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, DSK VV207320067, edited by The Federal Ministry of Defence of the Federal Republic of Germany, VR II 3, August 1992, English translation of ZDv 15/2, Humanitäres Völkerrecht in bewaffneten Konflikten – Handbuch, August 1992, § 304.
Guinea, Règlement de Service dans les Forces Armées, Volume 1: Règlement de Discipline Générale (Service Regulations in the Armed Forces, Volume 1: General Discipline Regulations), 2012 edition, Ministère de la Défense Nationale, approved by Presidential Decree No. D 293/PRG/SGG/2012, 6 December 2012, Article 12(a).
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) defines armed forces as “all organized units and personnel under [a] responsible command … [and] subject to [an] internal disciplinary system”.
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 16; see also p. 17.
3. foreigners, including citizens of neutral States, who belong to a belligerent’s armed forces.
b. Militias, i.e. volunteer groups or persons who, being a part of the armed forces, should be considered as regular troops with the status of legal combatant.
Indonesia, The Basics of International Humanitarian Law in Air Warfare, Indonesian Air Force, 1990, § 21.
1. The combatants must be led by a commander and be part of an organization with a chain of command.
2. The combatants must bear a fixed recognizable distinctive sign that can be recognized from afar.
3. The combatants must bear arms openly.
4. It is incumbent on combatants to behave in compliance with the rules and customs of war.
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, pp. 47–48.
Italy’s IHL Manual (1991) defines armed forces with reference to Article 43(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I.
Italy, Manuale di diritto umanitario, Introduzione e Volume I, Usi e convenzioni di Guerra, SMD-G-014, Stato Maggiore della Difesa, I Reparto, Ufficio Addestramento e Regolamenti, Rome, 1991, Vol. I, § 3.
2. they must be able to carry out sustained and concerted military operations.
Kenya, Law of Armed Conflict, Military Basic Course (ORS), 4 Précis, The School of Military Police, 1997, Précis No. 2, pp. 7–8.
Soldiers in combat must not consider members of the armed forces or volunteer militias, including organized resistance movements, as regular combatants unless they are under a responsible command, wear a distinctive sign, carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
Mali, Règlement du Service dans l’Armée, 1ère Partie: Discipline Générale, Ministère de la Défense Nationale, 1979, Article 36(1).
The term “armed forces” or “regular armed forces” covers only those formed in accordance with domestic legislation and recognized by the government in power at the time. Members of “other militia” are not therefore considered to form part of the regular establishment.
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 144.
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands defines armed forces with reference to Article 43(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I and states that all armed forces, whether regular or irregular, have to be “organized, under a responsible command, and subject to an internal disciplinary system”.
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. III-1; see also Handboek Militair, Ministerie van Defensie, 1995, p. 7-39.
- subject to an internal disciplinary system.
This not only applies to the armed forces of States, but also to members of resistance and liberation armies. The command need not consist of one person, but must be responsible for subordinates’ behaviour towards the party to the conflict (generally the State). The internal disciplinary system must ensure obedience to the rules of the humanitarian law of war.
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0303.
The armed forces of a party to the conflict comprise all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that party, even if the latter is represented by a government or authority not recognized by the adverse Party. This requirement of organization and responsibility extends to national liberation movements and their forces. All such forces must be subject to an internal disciplinary system which is required to enforce adherence to the rules of international law relating to armed conflict.
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 805(2).
In general, the armed forces of a state and of a party to a conflict consist of all organised units and personnel which are under a command responsible for the behaviour of its subordinates and each state and belligerent party must determine the categories of persons and objects belonging to its armed forces … Furthermore, the armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system in order to uphold and enforce the law of war.
Nigeria, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), Directorate of Legal Services, Nigerian Army, 1994, p. 38, § 4.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) defines the term “armed forces” as “a force trained and equipped by a State to conduct military air, sea and land operations in order to protect the sovereignty of that State from aggression by another State”.
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) defines “armed forces” in its Glossary of Terms as “a force trained and equipped by a State to conduct military air, sea and land operations in order to protect the sovereignty of that State from aggression by another State”.
The Russian Federation’s Military Manual (1990) defines armed forces with reference to Article 43(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I.
Russian Federation, Instructions on the Application of the Rules of International Humanitarian Law by the Armed Forces of the USSR, Appendix to Order of the USSR Defence Minister No. 75, 1990, §§ 12–13.
armed forces of a party to a conflict are organized armed units which are under a command responsible to that party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by the adverse party. The armed forces are subject to an internal disciplinary system which allows them to comply with the rules of international humanitarian law. The armed forces consist of combatants and non-combatants – medical and religious personnel.
Soldiers in combat must not consider members of the armed forces or volunteer militias, including organized resistance movements, as combatants unless they are under a responsible command, wear a distinctive sign, carry arms openly and respect the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
Senegal, Règlement de Discipline dans les Forces Armées, Décret 90-1159, 12 October 1990, Article 34(1).
Sierra Leone, The Law of Armed Conflict. Instructor Manual for the Republic of Sierra Leone Armed Forces (RSLAF), Armed Forces Education Centre, September 2007, p. 24.
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) states that all armed forces have to be organized, have a commander responsible for the conduct of his or her subordinates and an internal disciplinary system which ensures compliance with IHL.
Spain, Orientaciones. El Derecho de los Conflictos Armados, Publicación OR7-004, 2 Tomos, aprobado por el Estado Mayor del Ejército, División de Operaciones, 18 March 1996, Vol. I, § 1.3.a.(1).
Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states that all armed forces have to be organized, have a commander responsible for the conduct of his or her subordinates, and an internal disciplinary system which ensures compliance with IHL.
Spain, Orientaciones. El Derecho de los Conflictos Armados, Tomo 1, Publicación OR7–004, (Edición Segunda), Mando de Adiestramiento y Doctrina, Dirección de Doctrina, Orgánica y Materiales, 2 November 2007, § 1.3.a.(1).
Sweden’s IHL Manual (1991) defines armed forces with reference to Article 43(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I.
Sweden, International Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflict, with reference to the Swedish Total Defence System, Swedish Ministry of Defence, January 1991, Section 3.2.1.3, pp. 34–35.
The armed forces of a belligerent State (Party) consist of all organized armed forces which are under a command responsible to that State (Party) for the conduct of its subordinates.
Armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which shall enforce compliance with the rules of international humanitarian law.
Armed forces consist of combatants (those who fight) and medical and religious personnel (non-combatants).
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, § 1.2.21.
The UK Military Manual (1958) defines armed forces with reference to Article 4(A) of the 1949 Geneva Convention III.
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 89.
2. are subject to an internal disciplinary system which enforces compliance with the law of armed conflict.
It is customary for members of organised armed forces to wear uniform. The definition is wide enough to cover auxiliary and reserve forces.
(4) they comply with the law of armed conflict.
United Kingdom, The Law of Armed Conflict, D/DAT/13/35/66, Army Code 71130 (Revised 1981), Ministry of Defence, prepared under the Direction of The Chief of the General Staff, 1981, Section 3, p. 8, § 1.
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 4.33.
The US Field Manual (1956) and Air Force Pamphlet (1976) define armed forces with reference to Article 4(A) of the 1949 Geneva Convention III.
United States, Field Manual 27-10, The Law of Land Warfare, US Department of the Army, 18 July 1956, as modified by Change No. 1, 15 July 1976, § 61; Air Force Pamphlet 110-31, International Law – The Conduct of Armed Conflict and Air Operations, US Department of the Air Force, 1976, § 3-2.
include all members of the regularly organized armed forces of a party to the conflict … as well as irregular forces who are under responsible command and subject to internal military discipline, carry their arms openly, and otherwise distinguish themselves clearly from the civilian population.
United States, The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14M/MCWP 5-2.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7, issued by the Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and Headquarters, US Marine Corps, and Department of Transportation, US Coast Guard, October 1995 (formerly NWP 9 (Rev. A)/FMFM 1-10, October 1989), § 5.3.
The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Military Manual (1988) states: “Under the international law of war, the armed forces are bodies authorized to conduct military operations and against whom force is used in armed conflict”. The manual then lists the components of the armed forces, including the categories mentioned in Article 4(A)(1) and (2) of the 1949 Geneva Convention III.
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of, Propisi o Primeri Pravila Medjunarodnog Ratnog Prava u Oruzanim Snagama SFRJ, PrU-2, Savezni Sekretarijat za Narodnu Odbranu (Pravna Uprava), 1988, § 48(1) and (2).
Bangladesh’s Navy Ordinance (1961), as amended to 1986, states that “‘armed forces’ means the Bangladesh Army, the Bangladesh Navy and the Bangladesh Air Force and includes their reserves when called up for training, exercise or service”.
Bangladesh, Navy Ordinance, 1961, as amended to 1986, Article 4(ii).
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunals) Act (1973), as amended in 2009, states that “‘armed forces’ means the forces raised and maintained under the Army Act, 1952 (XXXIX of 1952), the Air Force Act, 1953 (VI of 1953), or the Navy Ordinance, 1961 (XXXV of 1961)”.
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunals) Act, 1973, as amended in 2009, Article 2(aa).
- Joint services of the armed forces.
Chad, Law on the Reorganization of the Armed and Security Forces, 2006, Article 5.
China, Military Service Law of the People’s Republic of China, 1984, as amended in 1998, Article 4.
China, Law of the People’s Republic of China on National Defence, 1997, Article 22.
India’s Army Act (1950) defines the term “the Forces” as meaning “the regular Army, Navy and Air Force or any part of any one or more them”.
India, Army Act, 1950, Section 3(xi).
Shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for the remainder of that person’s natural life, and shall also be liable to fine.
(a) “armed forces” means the naval, military and air forces and includes any member of the Armed Forces constituted under any law for the time being in force, including the paramilitary forces and any auxiliary forces that are under the control of the Central Government or the State Government.
India, Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, Article 376(2).
(A) The term “transitional period” shall refer to the period beginning on 30 June 2004 and lasting until the formation of an elected Iraqi government pursuant to a permanent constitution as set forth in this Law, which in any case shall be no later than 31 December 2005, unless the provisions of Article 61 are applied.
Iraq, Law of Administration for the State of Iraq for the Transitional Period, 2004, Preamble and Articles 2(A) and 27(A)–(B).
The AFP [Armed Forces of the Philippines] shall consist of the General Headquarters; the Major Services namely: the Philippine Army, the Philippine Air Force, the Philippine Navy and, until otherwise provided by law, the Philippine Constabulary; and other existing units, services and commands of the AFP. The Secretary of National Defense may, in accordance with the policies or directives of the President, create additional units, services and commands, or reorganize the AFP in response to any situation or in pursuance of operational or contingency plans. No Major Service may be unfilled, inactivated or merged with another Major Service, without the approval of the Congress.
Whenever dictated by military necessity, and upon the recommendation of the Secretary of National Defense and approved by the President, the Citizen Armed Force may be called or mobilized to complement the operations of the regular force of the AFP or to support the regular force formations or units. For this purpose, Active Auxiliary Units which shall be part of the Citizen Armed Force Geographical Units, may be utilized, to be constituted out of volunteers to be screened in consultations with the local executives and civic business leaders. The status of Active Auxiliary Units shall be of a degree of activation of military reservists short of full active duty status. They shall not be vested with law-enforcement or police functions.
All members of the Citizen Armed Force on training or service shall be subject to military law and the Articles of War.
Philippines, Executive Order No. 292, 1987, Book IV, Title VIII, Subtitle II, Chapter 6, Sections 35 and 37(2) and (3).
Uzbekistan, Defence Law Amendment Act, 2001, Article 6.
The Bolivarian National Armed Forces are composed of four military components: the Bolivarian National Army, the Bolivarian National Navy, the Bolivarian National Air Force and the Bolivarian National Guard.
Venezuela, Law on the Bolivarian National Armed Forces, 2008, Articles 29 and 43.
The Bolivarian National Armed Forces are composed of four military components: the Bolivarian Army, the Bolivarian Navy, the Bolivarian Air Force and the Bolivarian National Guard.
Venezuela, Law on the Bolivarian National Armed Forces, 2008, as amended in 2009, Articles 29 and 43.
The Report on the Practice of Zimbabwe (1998) asserts that the incorporation of Article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I into national legislation by the 1981 Geneva Conventions Act as amended “is evidence of [Zimbabwe’s] view that [it represents] customary international law”.
Report on the Practice of Zimbabwe, 1998, Chapter 1.1 with reference to Zimbabwe, Geneva Conventions Act as amended (1981).
(1) The Defence Forces of Zimbabwe consist of an Army, an Air Force and any other services that may be established under an Act of Parliament.
(2) The Defence Forces are the only lawful military forces in Zimbabwe.
(3) The Defence Forces must respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of all persons and be non-partisan, national in character, patriotic, professional and subordinate to the civilian authority as established by this Constitution.
(4) The Defence Forces must be maintained as disciplined military forces.
(5) An Act of Parliament must provide for the organisation, structure, management, regulation, discipline and promotion and demotion of officers and other members and, subject to section 218, the conditions of service of members of the Defence Forces.
Zimbabwe, Constitution, 2013, Section 211.
… Not only a State is regarded as a belligerent party … [Pursuant to] article 1 of the … [1907 Hague] Regulation[s], the laws, rights, and duties of war apply not only to armies, but also to militia and volunteer [corps] if they fulfil the list of conditions, e.g. they should conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
… [T]he panel of judges, [pursuant to] article 200 of the Code of Administrative Court Procedure of Ukraine, decided to … [uphold] the judgment of the court of first instance … without any alterations.
Ukraine, Kyiv Administrative Court of Appeal, War veterans case, Decision, 17 February 2009.
A report submitted to the Belgian Senate in 1991 noted that two elements were essential in the definition of armed forces: first, they must be integrated into a military organization (that is, a hierarchical structure) subject to an internal disciplinary system; second, this organization must operate under a command structure responsible to a party for the conduct of its subordinates. If these two conditions were fulfilled, the concept of armed forces could be extended to groups of combatants who were left behind in an occupied territory to perform acts of sabotage, to gather intelligence or to take part in guerrilla warfare. The report recalled that this was the position of the Belgian government in exile during the Second World War. From its base in London, the government adopted legislation authorizing the executive power to nominate agents in charge of action or intelligence missions in a foreign country, occupied area or zone evacuated by the enemy. These agents had the status of combatants and were allowed to carry arms. The government in exile, however, was very reticent about resistance cells or individuals over whom it had no direct control.
Belgium, Senate, Report, Enquête parlementaire sur l’existence en Belgique d’un réseau de renseignements clandestin international, 1990–1991 Session, Doc. 1117-4, 1 October 1991, §§ 19 and 20.
Resistance networks operating behind enemy lines would not be protected, according to the report, if composed of civilians that were neither part of a hierarchical structure nor subject to an internal disciplinary system.
Belgium, Senate, Report, Enquête parlementaire sur l’existence en Belgique d’un réseau de renseignements clandestin international, 1990–1991 Session, Doc. 1117-4, 1 October 1991, § 25.
On the basis of the report, the Report on the Practice of Belgium concludes that the definition given in Article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I is recognized by Belgium and that the central criterion is State control over the combatants.
Report on the Practice of Belgium, 1997, Chapter 1.1.
[I]t would be useful to give some consideration to the issue of how the “armed forces” of a State should be defined. Such a definition appears in Article 43 of the … 1977 Protocol I additional to the Geneva Conventions. It reads: “The armed forces of a Party to a conflict consist of all organized armed forces, groups and units which are under a command responsible to that Party …”.
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Oral pleadings before the ICJ, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide case (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), 6 March 2006, Verbatim Record CR 2006/10, p. 36, § 59.
France, Etat-major de la Force d’Action Rapide, Ordres pour l’Opération Mistral, 1995, Section 5.
In an explanatory memorandum submitted to the German Parliament in 1990 in the context of the ratification procedure of the Additional Protocols, the German Government stated that the 1977 Additional Protocol I contained the first treaty definition of the term “armed forces” and acknowledged that armed forces must be organized, under responsible leadership and have an internal disciplinary system.
Germany, Lower House of Parliament, Explanatory memorandum on the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, BT-Drucksache 11/6770, 22 March 1990, p. 110.
According to the Report on the Practice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, military communiqués issued during the Iran–Iraq War referred to armed forces as “Combatants of Islam” or “Devoters of Armed Forces”. In three of these communiqués, the armed forces are defined as personnel of the army and air force, Gendarmerie, Revolutionary Guards (Sepah-e-Pasdaran), armed tribesmen, Basseej and Jehad forces, volunteers and also the Kurdish commandos (Kurd Pihmerg). Some other military communiqués also thanked tribesmen and ordinary people who had taken up arms against the “Iraqi aggressors”. The report specifies that, since all the military staff and armed forces were under a single command responsible to the Islamic Republic of Iran, the practice and opinio juris of the Islamic Republic of Iran are consistent with Article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I.
Report on the Practice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1997, Chapter 1.1, referring to Military Communiqué No. 35, 24 September 1980, Military Communiqué No. 36, 24 September 1980, Military Communiqué No. 109, 4 October 1980, Military Communiqué No. 354, 1 January 1981 and Military Communiqué No. 477, 13 May 1981.
The Report on the Practice of Japan states that the Japanese Government understands that Japanese Self-Defence Forces (Jieitai) are categorized as armed forces as referred to in Article 4 of the 1949 Geneva Convention III.
Report on the Practice of Japan, 1998, Chapter 1.1, referring to Statement by a member of the Japanese Government in the House of Representatives Cabinet Committee, 30 October 1986.
In an explanatory memorandum submitted to the Dutch Parliament in the context of the ratification procedure of the 1977 Additional Protocols, the Government of the Netherlands stated that armed forces consisted of regular as well as irregular troops, provided they fulfilled the conditions set forth in Article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I.
Netherlands, Lower House of Parliament, Explanatory memorandum on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, 1983–1984 Session, Doc. 18 277 (R 1247), No. 3, pp. 18–20.
The Report on the Practice of the Republic of Korea affirms the customary nature of Article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I.
Report on the Practice of the Republic of Korea, 1997, Chapter 1.1.
On the basis of a statement by the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs before the UN General Assembly in 1997, the Report on the Practice of the Syrian Arab Republic asserts that the Syrian Arab Republic considers that the definition of armed forces contained in Article 43(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I is part of customary international law.
Report on the Practice of the Syrian Arab Republic, 1997, Chapter 1.1, referring to Statement by the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs before the UN General Assembly, 1 October 1997.
This definition is subjective and difficult to implement, given that States are generally unwilling to recognize rebel groups and their structures … preferring to deal with them as mere “criminals or bandits”. In Zimbabwe this issue is yet to be addressed in terms of policy and military instruction. It is by no means settled and cannot be regarded as being part of customary law.
Report on the Practice of Zimbabwe, 1998, Chapter 1.1.
In the Lubanga case before the ICC in 2006, Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, a former president of the Union des Patriotes Congolais (UPC) and commander-in-chief of the Forces patriotiques pour la libération du Congo (FPLC), was charged, inter alia, with the war crimes of enlisting, conscripting and using children under the age of 15 years to participate actively in hostilities (Article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) and (e)(vii) of the 1998 ICC Statute).
ICC, Lubanga case, Warrant of Arrest, 10 February 2006.
271. The Chamber considers that the expression “national armed forces” must … be defined. In this regard, Article 43 of Protocol Additional I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 defines the armed forces of a Party to a conflict as consisting of all organised armed forces, groups or units which are under a command responsible to that Party for the conduct of its subordinates, even if that Party is represented by a government or an authority not recognized by an adverse Party. Such armed forces must be subject to an internal disciplinary system which, inter alia, enforces compliance with the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict.
273. The commentary on Article 43 of Protocol I states that the notion of “party to the conflict” is fairly wide, involving not only resistance movements representing a pre-existing subject of international law and governments in exile, but also those fighting for conflicts of “self-determination” or “national liberation”.
274. Furthermore, the Chamber notes that Article 1 of the 1907 Hague Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War, which has become part of customary law, also requires militia and volunteer corps that are not part of an army to fulfil the following conditions: be commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; have a fixed distinctive emblem recognizable at a distance; carry arms openly; and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
275. With regard to the term “national”, which qualifies armed forces in the context of article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) of the [1998 ICC] Statute, the Chamber recalls that the context of international armed conflict is not restricted solely to the use of force between two states, but that it extends to certain situations in which parties to the conflict may be organised armed forces or groups. The issue raised here is whether the adjective “national” qualifying “armed forces” limits the scope of the application of this provision to “governmental” armed forces.
277. Firstly, the ordinary meaning of the adjective “national” does not necessarily lead to an interpretation of the term as meaning governmental armed forces. In this regard, the Chamber notes that the Appeals Chamber of the ICTY defined the term “national” within the meaning of Article 4(1) of the Fourth Geneva Convention for the purpose of determining who can be considered a “protected person” under the Convention.
280. Accordingly, the Chamber observes that the Appeals Chamber of the ICTY has construed the term “national” in Article 4(1) of the Fourth Geneva Convention as referring not solely to nationality as such, but also to the fact of belonging to the opposing party in an armed conflict.
281. Secondly, interpreting the term “national” to mean “governmental” can only undermine the object and purpose of the Statute of the Court, which is none other than to ensure that “the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole” must no longer go unpunished.
282. Thus, construing the term “national” to mean “governmental” might present the judge with a genuine paradox. Indeed, he or she might be led to consider that an alleged perpetrator can be held responsible if he or she belongs to a party to a conflict which is linked to a State (the armed forces of a State, such as the UPDF), but would escape prosecution if he or she belonged to a party to the same conflict described as an armed group (such as the FPLC).
284. In fact, on the basis of basic humanitarian considerations and common sense, it would be absurd that Thomas Lubanga Dyilo could incur criminal responsibility for the crime of enlisting or conscripting children under the age of fifteen years only in the context of an internal armed conflict solely because the FPLC, as an armed force, could not be described as a “national armed force” within the meaning of article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) of the [1998 ICC] Statute. This would be tantamount to admitting that the perpetrator of such a crime could escape prosecution simply because his or her acts were committed in the context of an international armed conflict. The drafters of the Statute wanted to include under article 8 of the Statute a larger array of criminal conduct committed in the context of an international armed conflict.
285. Thus, the Chamber considers that, under article 8(2)(b)(xxvi) of the Statute, the term “the national armed forces” is not limited to the armed forces of a State.
ICC, Lubanga case, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 29 January 2007, §§ 271–285.
234. Taking into consideration the principles and rules of international armed conflict reflected in the international instruments above-mentioned, the Chamber adds that those “organized armed groups” must be under responsible command. In this regard, responsible command entails some degree of organization of those armed groups, including the possibility to impose discipline and the ability to plan and carry out military operations.
236. In addition, the Chamber wishes to clarify that the legal requirement contained in article 1(1) of [the 1977] Additional Protocol II for the organized armed group(s) to exert control over a part of the territory is not a requirement under the Statute.
ICC, Bemba case, Decision on the confirmation of charges, 15 June 2009, §§ 233–234 and 236.
(ii) Participated in the organisation, co-ordination or planning of military operations.
SCSL, Sesay case, Judgment, 2 March 2009, §§ 189 and 975.
The “armed forces” of a State and of a Party to the conflict consist of all organized units and personnel which are under a command responsible for the behaviour of its subordinates … The command of the armed forces must be responsible to the belligerent Party to which it belongs. The armed forces shall be subject to an internal disciplinary system which enforces compliance with the law of war.
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, §§ 36, 40 and 41.
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), Geneva, 8 June 1977, Article 43(3). Article 43 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.39, 25 May 1977, p. 111.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 3-2, § 14.
If a party to a conflict incorporates paramilitary or armed law enforcement agencies into its armed forces, it must inform other parties to the conflict of this fact. These forces are then considered lawful combatants.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 307.
When a party to a conflict decides to incorporate within its armed forces a paramilitary force or another armed corps responsible for maintenance of order (police), it must inform the adversary. In our country the paramilitary forces consist of customs officers, water and forest agents, and the national police. They are entitled to participate directly in hostilities and they must naturally completely respect the rules established for combatants. In case of capture, their members are entitled to the same protection as prisoners of war.
Côte d’Ivoire, Droit de la guerre, Manuel d’instruction, Livre III, Tome 1: Instruction de l’élève officier d’active de 1ère année, Manuel de l’élève, Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Nationales, November 2007, p. 29.
Whenever a party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall notify the other parties to the conflict. In the Federal Republic of Germany the Federal Border Commands including their Border Guard formations and units as well as the Federal Border Guard School shall become part of the armed forces upon the outbreak of an armed conflict.
Germany, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, DSK VV207320067, edited by The Federal Ministry of Defence of the Federal Republic of Germany, VR II 3, August 1992, English translation of ZDv 15/2, Humanitäres Völkerrecht in bewaffneten Konflikten – Handbuch, August 1992, § 307.
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. III-3, § 2.
Before … AP I [1977 Additional Protocol I] came into force, it was important to clarify the position of resistance fighters. Thus, in September 1944, the recognized armed resistance groups, the Orde Dienst (Order of Service), the Knokploegen (Assault Groups) and the Raad van Verzet (Council of Resistance) were grouped together into the Binnenlandse Strijdkrachten (Inland Armed Forces). Members were given the status of soldiers of the Royal Dutch Army.
In the same month, the storm troops established in Limburg and North Brabant also became members of the Inland Armed Forces. Parties to AP I no longer have formally to recognize resistance groups.
A State may include a paramilitary organization or armed service entrusted with political responsibilities in its armed forces. The other parties to a conflict must be informed of this. In the Netherlands, this provision is used for civilian surveillance personnel of the armed forces (see below). Nothing like this applies to the Royal Marechaussee (frontier guards). It forms part of the Dutch armed forces, although it performs many tasks for ministries other than that of Defence. Members of this force therefore usually have combatant status.
The Netherlands identifies its Navy Security Corps (Marine Beveiligingskorps) and the civilian surveillance of the Royal Dutch Army as paramilitary organizations, which also form part of the armed forces during an armed conflict. Such personnel are recognizable because they are uniformed and armed. The Swiss Federal Council has been notified of this.
0315. It must be remembered that most countries’ armed forces are composed differently from those of the Netherlands. They may fall into categories different from similar groups in the Netherlands and have different status under the humanitarian law of war.
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, §§ 0303, 0311 and 0314–0315.
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 806(1).
The manual provides two examples of paramilitary agencies incorporated into the armed forces of a State, namely “the Special Auxiliary Force attached to Bishop Muzorewa’s United African National Congress in Zimbabwe and which was embodied into the national army after the Bishop became Prime Minister [and] India’s Border Security Force in Assam”.
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 806(1), footnote 25.
At the time of the outbreak of World War II, the Burma Frontier Force was serving as a police force under authority of the Burma Frontier Force Act; after the fall of Burma, the Burmese Government in exile in Simla, India, passed legislation making the Force part of the Burmese Army and subject to the Burma Army Act.
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 806(1), footnote 26.
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) states that members of the Guardia Civil are lawful combatants.
Switzerland, Bases légales du comportement à l’engagement (BCE), Règlement 51.007/IVf, Swiss Army, issued based on Article 10 of the Ordinance on the Organization of the Federal Department for Defence, Civil Protection and Sports of 7 March 2003, entry into force on 1 July 2005, § 172. The German language version notes: “… as long as they do not take part in the fighting or, respectively, are not integrated into the armed forces [“solange sie nicht am Kampf teilnimmt bzw. nicht in die Streitkräfte integriert ist”]”.
To avoid confusion, the law requires that “whenever a Party to a conflict incorporates a paramilitary or armed law enforcement agency into its armed forces it shall so notify the other Parties to the conflict”.
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 4.3.6.
The Report on the Practice of Germany (1997) notes that from 1965 to 1994, German border guards were granted the status of combatants. In 1994, the German Parliament adopted a law that changed the status of the border guards. The reason for this change was that, as combatants, these guards could become legitimate enemy targets and they could involve local police forces as targets when operating in joint action. In addition, even civilian objects protected by the police might become targets.
Report on the Practice of Germany, 1997, Chapter 1.1, referring to Federal Border Police Law, 1994, Article 4.
The Decree on the Constitution of the Integrated National Police (1975) of the Philippines provides that the Philippine Constabulary, responsible as the nucleus of the Integrated National Police for police, jail and fire services, “shall remain and continue to be a major service of the Armed Forces”. Within this framework, the Integrated National Police “shall function directly under the Department of National Defense”.
Philippines, Decree on the Constitution of the Integrated National Police, 1975, Sections 5 and 7.
The police force shall be organized, trained and equipped primarily for the performance of police functions. Its national scope and civilian character shall be paramount. No element of the police force shall be military nor shall any position thereof be occupied by active members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
Sec. 12. Relationship of the Department with the Department of National Defense. – During a period of twenty-four (24) months from the effectivity of this Act, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) shall continue its present role of preserving the internal and external security of the State: Provided, That said period may be extended by the President, if he finds it justifiable, for another period not exceeding twenty-four (24) months, after which the Department shall automatically take over from the AFP the primary role of preserving internal security, leaving to the AFP its primary role of preserving external security. However, even after the Department has assumed primary responsibility on matters affecting internal security, including the suppression of insurgency, and there are serious threats to national security and public order, such as where insurgents have gained considerable foothold in the community thereby necessitating the employment of bigger tactical forces and the utilization of higher caliber armaments and better armoured vehicles, the President may, upon recommendation of the peace and order council, call upon the Armed Forces of the Philippines to assume the primary role and the Philippine National Police (PNP) to play the supportive role in the area concerned.
In times of national emergency, all elements of the PNP, the Bureau of Fire Protection, and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology shall, upon direction of the President, assist the Armed Forces of the Philippines in meeting the national emergency.
Philippines, Republic Act No. 6975, 1990, Sections 2 and 12.
Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy and Principles. – It is hereby declared the policy of the State to establish a highly efficient and competent police force which is national in scope and civilian in character administered and controlled by a national police commission.
Sec. 12. Relationship of the Department with the Department of National Defense. – The Department of the Interior and Local Government shall be relieved of the primary responsibility on matters involving the suppression of insurgency and other serious threats to national security. The Philippine National Police shall, through information gathering and performance of its ordinary police functions, support the Armed Forces of the Philippines on matters involving suppression of insurgency, except in cases where the President shall call on the PNP to support the AFP in combat operations.
In times of national emergency, the PNP, the Bureau of Fire Protection, and the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology shall, upon the direction of the President, assist the armed forces in meeting the national emergency.
Philippines, Republic Act No. 8551, 1998, Sections 2–3.
Whereas, in view of Section 6 of Executive Order No. 220 and pursuant to a Memorandum of Undertaking executed by and between representatives of the Government and the Cordillera People’s Liberation Army on August 11, 1999, there is a need for the immediate integration of qualified members of the Cordillera People’s Liberation Army into the Armed Forces of the Philippines.
Philippines, Administrative Order No. 18, 2001, preamble.
Pursuant to Spain’s Military Criminal Code (1985), the Guardia Civil is an armed military body that exclusively falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Defence, in times of siege warfare or when called upon to carry out missions of a military nature.
Spain, Military Criminal Code, 1985, Article 9.
Report on the Practice of Zimbabwe, 1998, Chapter 1.1 with reference to Zimbabwe, Geneva Conventions Act as amended, 1981.
The Report on the Practice of India refers to a decision of the Supreme Court which did not consider, for administrative purposes, civilian clerks of a special police unit (the Indo-Tibetan Border Force, which is itself part of the armed forces of India) as members of the armed forces. According to the report, however, members of this force might be treated as combatants for the purpose of the application of IHL.
Report on the Practice of India, 1997, Chapter 1.1, referring to Supreme Court, Dobhal case, Judgment, 16 August 1994, §§ 1–8.
Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Belgium notified the High Contracting Parties of the duties assigned to the Belgian Gendarmerie (constabulary) in time of armed conflict. Belgium considered that this notification fully satisfied any and all requirements of Article 43 pertaining to the Gendarmerie. It informed the High Contracting Parties that the Gendarmerie was formed to maintain law and order and was, according to national legislation, a police force which was part of the armed forces within the meaning of Article 43 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I. Consequently, members of the Gendarmerie had the status of combatant in time of international armed conflict.
Belgium, Interpretative declarations made upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, 20 May 1986, § 2.
An Act of Parliament of 18 July 1991 has, however, put an end to this situation as it has disconnected the Gendarmerie from the armed forces.
Belgium, Law on Demilitarization of the Gendarmerie, 1991.
Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, France informed the States party to the 1977 Additional Protocol I that its armed forces permanently include the Gendarmerie.
France, Reservations and declarations made upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, 11 April 2001, § 7.
Whereas members of a civilian police force that is solely a civilian police force, who have no combat function are not considered combatants under the Law of Armed Conflict, international law recognises that this principle does not apply where police are part of the armed forces of a party. In those circumstances, they may constitute a legitimate military target. In other words, the status of the Palestinian “police” under the Law of Armed Conflict depends on whether they fulfilled combat functions in the course of the armed conflict. The evidence thus far is compelling that they are.
Israel, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Operation in Gaza 27 December 2008–18 January 2009: Factual and Legal Aspects, 29 July 2009, § 238.
On the basis of a statement by the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs before the UN General Assembly in 1997, the Report on the Practice of the Syrian Arab Republic asserts that the Syrian Arab Republic considers that the rule contained in Article 43(3) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I is part of customary international law.
87. The armed law enforcement agencies of a State are generally mandated only to protect and maintain the internal order of the State. Thus, as a general presumption and in the execution of their typical law enforcement duties, such forces are considered to be civilians for the purposes of international humanitarian law. This same presumption will not exist for military police or gendarmerie that operate under the control of the military.
88. The Chamber is of the opinion that the status of police officers in a time of armed conflict must be determined on a case-by-case basis in light of an analysis of the particular facts. A civilian police force, for instance, may be incorporated into the armed forces, which will cause the police to be classified as combatants instead of civilians. This incorporation may occur de lege, by way of a formal Act, or de facto.
SCSL, Sesay case, Judgment, 2 March 2009, §§ 87–88.

References: § 512
 § 5
 § 352
 § 412
 § 304
 § 305
 § 304
 § 21
 § 3
 § 144
 § 0303
 § 805
 § 4
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 89
 § 1
 § 4
 § 61
 § 3
 § 5
 § 48
 § 25
 v. 
 § 59
 § 14
 § 307
 § 307
 § 2
 § 806
 § 806
 § 806
 § 172
 § 4
 § 2
 § 7
 § 238