As the guardian of international humanitarian law (IHL), the ICRC supports efforts to end impunity for international crimes and is keenly interested in the establishment and jurisprudence of international criminal tribunals. However, ICRC staff do not testify before such tribunals.

The present comparativetable seeks to provide the war crimes over which the International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction, together with the definition of such offences as found in other sources of international humanitarian law (IHL).

Extract from ICRC publication "International humanitarian law: answers to your questions"

Fact sheet describing some elements and modalities which could bring about a concrete improvement in the effectiveness of sanctions in the efforts by all parties to ensure greater respect for international humanitarian law.

The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Protocol 1 of 1977 each have a definition of what constitutes grave breaches.

Three main arguments may explain why few cases in international (and national) criminal law include charges for attacks against civilians or civilian objects. The law may not be sufficiently clear, there may be a lack of evidence or the selection of military targets may be based on mainly subjective considerations, which make it very hard to establish individual culpability. This article examines some legal and practical reasons for the difficulties the prosecutor faces when trying to charge individuals with such crimes. Although there are few examples, the ICTY has shown that it is generally possible to hold individuals responsible for such crimes.

Theme: sanctions. Sanctions are an integral part of every coherent legal system, and the threat of an effective sanction has a dissuasive effect. The culture of war – and the constant assault on the ethical norms and conventions of war – has produced a demand for justice among both combatants and non-combatants. This Review examines the part played by sanctions in obtaining greater respect for international humanitarian law and which form citizens expect justice to take, i.e. what kind of punishment, what it should be based on and who should sit in judgment.

Transitional justice encompasses a number of mechanisms that seek to allow post-conflict societies to deal with past atrocities in circumstances of radical change. However, two of these mechanisms, i.e. truth commissions and criminal processes, might clash if the former are combined with amnesties. This article examines the possibility of employing the Rome Statute’s article 53 so as to allow these two mechanisms to operate in a complementary manner.

Theme: Truth and reconciliation commissions. Penal prosecution was seen as antagonistic to reconciliation strategies, but the “justice versus peace” problem is now seen as a simplification of the debate. Reconciliation is increasingly understood as an umbrella-term for an overall process which includes the search for truth, justice and forgiveness. This issue concentrates on the problems raised by Truth and Reconciliation Commissions and provides an overview of the ones established, their successes and their failures.

The fact that international criminal tribunals have become operational has undoubtedly changed the face of the global humanitarian environment. Humanitarian organizations face a very difficult dilemma: on the one hand they cannot ignore the important role of international criminal prosecution, while on the other they are reluctant to put their operations in the field at risk by being seen to co-operate in judicial proceedings. Furthermore, a categorical refusal to co-operate could lead to their being compelled to testify.

This article appraises the contribution of the International Court of Justice to international humanitarian law. In its judgments and opinions, the Court has helped to clarify the relationship between the law of armed conflict with general international law, customary norms, and jus cogens and to identify fundamental principles of international humanitarian law.

Special issue: Impunity - the International Criminal Court

ICRC legal adviser Gabor Rona examines the unique nature of the ICRC’s international legal status, the three specific sources in international law for the ICRC’s testimonial protection, and discusses the reasons behind the ICRC’s policy on testimony as well as related issues.

The repression of war crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia is principally the remit of the International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague, which focuses on the most high-profile cases. For several years, however, national war crimes tribunals have been set up in Croatia and Serbia to complement the work begun in The Hague. The ICRC regularly visits individuals charged and sentenced by these courts and, in certain cases, arranges for the families to visit their detained relatives. – Article published in the Red Cross Red Crescent Magazine, No. 2, 2006

States party to the main IHL and other related treaties: Protection of Victims of Armed Conflicts - International Criminal Court - Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict - Environment - Weapons

TRIAL WATCH (Track Impunity Always - a Swiss anti-impunity organization) offers a wide audience easy access to current and past legal proceedings for international crimes (mainly war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, torture and aggression) in both national and international courts.

The aim of this site is to promote understanding of international humanitarian law in the belief that a wider knowledge of the legal framework governing armed conflict will lead to greater pressure to prevent breaches of the law, and to punish those who commit them.