Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries
  • Print page
Commentary of 2020 
Article 26 : Food
Text of the provision*
(1) The basic daily food rations shall be sufficient in quantity, quality and variety to keep prisoners of war in good health and to prevent loss of weight or the development of nutritional deficiencies. Account shall also be taken of the habitual diet of the prisoners.
(2) The Detaining Power shall supply prisoners of war who work with such additional rations as are necessary for the labour on which they are employed.
(3) Sufficient drinking water shall be supplied to prisoners of war. The use of tobacco shall be permitted.
(4) Prisoners of war shall, as far as possible, be associated with the preparation of their meals; they may be employed for that purpose in the kitchens. Furthermore, they shall be given the means of preparing, themselves, the additional food in their possession.
(5) Adequate premises shall be provided for messing.
(6) Collective disciplinary measures affecting food are prohibited.
* Paragraph numbers have been added for ease of reference.
Reservations or declarations

A. Introduction
2105  Article 15 of the Third Convention requires that the Detaining Power provide for the maintenance of prisoners of war. This includes the basic obligation to provide them with food and water. Article 26 contains more detailed rules and sets the standard that the food and water that prisoners receive must be sufficient to keep them in good health and prevent loss of weight or the development of nutritional deficiencies.
2106  Historically, the ‘principle of assimilation’ set the standard for the food rations of prisoners of war.[1] The 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions each contained a provision requiring that prisoners of war ‘be treated as regards food, quarters, and clothing, on the same footing as the troops of the Government which has captured them’.[2] Under the present article, however, it is not enough to treat prisoners of war on the same footing as one’s own armed forces. Rather, the Detaining Power must ensure that the food and water provided to prisoners of war is sufficient to meet their health needs and takes into account their habitual diet, as well as the labour on which individual prisoners are employed.
2107  Article 26 recognizes the importance of food for prisoners of war, not only for their physical health, but also for their general well-being. This is reflected in the requirement that as far as possible prisoners be involved in the preparation of their meals and that adequate premises be made available for eating.
Back to top
B. Historical background
2108  The Detaining Power has been obliged to provide prisoners of war with food since the rules on their treatment were first set down in treaty form. In early treaties, the traditional standard of assimilation regulated the provision of food, with the Detaining Power obliged to treat prisoners of war in this respect ‘on the same footing as the troops of the Government who captured them’.[3] Subsequently, Article 11 of the 1929 Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War reverted to the assimilation standard, providing simply that the ‘food ration of prisoners of war shall be equivalent in quantity and quality to that of the depot troops’.[4]
2109  The 1929 text was not entirely satisfactory, however, primarily because in some armies depot troops did not exist, precluding comparison.[5] Furthermore, during the Second World War, some Powers used the wording of Article 11 to justify allocating insufficient rations to prisoners of war, based on what was available to their own troops.[6] Certain Detaining Powers did recognize the importance of considering prisoners’ habitual diets.[7] On the whole, however, the many difficulties encountered during that war led to a sense that Article 11 would benefit from being strengthened.[8]
2110  During the Conference of Government Experts that preceded the 1949 Diplomatic Conference, there were discussions concerning the most appropriate standard for determining how to allocate rations to prisoners of war. One discussion concerned whether measuring the quantity and quality of food intake by its calorific content would be appropriate.[9] Another centred on whether food intake should be measured against the rations on which the local population subsisted.[10] However, both standards were rejected. Ultimately, it was decided that the appropriate standard would be to ensure that the quantity and quality of food is sufficient to keep prisoners in good health and that the adequacy of rations should be tested by periodic checks on prisoners’ health.[11]
2111  The Conference also discussed whether, like the 1929 Convention, the principle of assimilation should apply to food rations. However, given the experiences of the Second World War, caution was expressed about relying on this principle, in part because prisoners are not always able to subsist on the rations provided to the Detaining Power’s own forces, and also because members of the armed forces of the Detaining Power are often able to supplement their rations, as can the civilian population, which is not the case for prisoners of war.[12] Ultimately, the delegates upheld the principle that food rations must be sufficient to keep prisoners in good health and to prevent weight loss or the development of nutritional deficiencies.[13]
Back to top
C. Paragraph 1: Determination of the basic daily rations
1. First sentence: Basic daily rations
2112  Article 26 provides that prisoners’ basic daily food rations must be sufficient in quantity and quality to keep them in good health, including by preventing weight loss or nutritional deficiencies (i.e. vitamin and mineral deficiencies, also referred to as ‘micronutrient deficiencies’). In this regard, it is important that all prisoners of war have equal access to basic daily food rations, and that no adverse distinction is made in the distribution of food. Certain prisoners may, however, benefit from privileged treatment if, for example, their health or age require it.[14] Wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health by restricting the quantity or quality of food provided to prisoners of war constitutes a grave breach of the Convention.[15] The requirement to provide persons deprived of their liberty with adequate food is also part of customary international law.[16]
2113  A balanced diet is important for good health. Generally, a balanced diet should include ingredients from each of the main food groups: staples (such as grains, cereals, roots or tubers), protein sources (such as pulses, beans, dairy products, meat, fish, etc.); fats and oils (such as butter, vegetable oils, oily seeds, etc.); and vegetables and fruit (such as spinach, tomatoes, carrots, broccoli, oranges, mangoes, berries, etc.). These food groups provide the required energy, protein, fibre and micronutrients for optimum health. The Detaining Power should refer to international guidelines on nutrition in composing prisoners’ daily rations.[17] A qualified nutritionist should be involved in composing the diet plan for the camp. To fulfil the requirement in the first sentence of Article 26, the Detaining Power must take into account several factors, including the state of health of individual prisoners, as well as the climatic and other conditions in which the prisoners live and work. Rations for prisoners with health conditions must be adapted to their condition.[18] Children, older persons, and pregnant or lactating women must similarly be provided with rations that keep them in good health.
2114  As the daily ration must be sufficient to prevent weight loss or micronutrient deficiencies, Article 26 should be read together with the obligation in Article 31 to conduct medical inspections of prisoners of war ‘at least once a month’. These inspections serve a number of purposes, including monitoring ‘the general state of health, nutrition and cleanliness’ of prisoners, and must include ‘the checking and the recording of the weight of each prisoner of war’. This obligation also entails checking for signs of micronutrient deficiencies. Should such deficiencies be found in a prisoner, or in the general prisoner-of-war population, the Detaining Power must act quickly to remedy them. In addition to the medical professionals performing the inspections, the Detaining Power may also rely on the advice of other health-care practitioners, such as dieticians.
2115  The language of Article 26 regarding the prevention of weight loss reflects experiences during the Second World War, where prisoners were often found to be undernourished. It may be that some prisoners lose weight during internment even though the rations provided by the Detaining Power are sufficient to keep them in good health. As well as measuring weight, calculating body mass index provides a more complete picture of the sufficiency of a prisoner’s diet. However, even in the absence of evidence of malnutrition, the adequacy of the diet of prisoners of war must be assessed according to current knowledge regarding the essential components of a healthy and balanced diet.
2116  The Detaining Power must set up a food-supply system for prisoners of war that will ensure they receive a sufficient quantity and quality of food. The Detaining Power must know how many prisoners of war it has and, on that basis, ensure that rations are in line with recommended practice.[19] In this vein, a Detaining Power should establish a balanced menu and put in place a well-functioning supply chain, adequate storage and cooking facilities, and a proper food-distribution system within the camp.
2117  The obligation on the Detaining Power to provide basic daily rations applies even if prisoners can access some of their food from other sources. This obligation may be fulfilled in a variety of ways. Camps may have facilities for the preparation of food, or the Detaining Power may supply camps with ready meals. The ICRC has observed that in some armed conflicts the Detaining Powers provided prisoners of war with space and facilities to cultivate their own vegetables.
2118  Cases of prisoners of war participating in hunger strikes pose an ethical dilemma for the Detaining Power. The obligation in Article 26 to provide adequate food to prisoners of war is satisfied where the prisoner has been provided with rations that are sufficient in quantity and quality.[20]
2119  A Detaining Power may face food shortages, making it difficult to provide sufficient food for its own troops and nationals, let alone prisoners of war. Such situations do not, however, override its obligation to meet the food needs of the prisoners in its custody. If it finds itself unable to meet those needs itself, it must take appropriate measures, which could include requesting or accepting assistance from other States or from an impartial humanitarian organization such as the ICRC; transferring the prisoners to another Power, subject to Article 12; or ultimately releasing and repatriating the prisoners.[21] In all other circumstances, it should consider offers to provide assistance in good faith.[22]
2120  The times at which meals are to be distributed to or prepared by prisoners of war should be made known to them.
Back to top
2. Second sentence: Habitual diet of prisoners of war
2121  It may be that, even though the Detaining Power provides prisoners of war with sufficient basic rations, the prisoners do not wish to eat the food because it is not in keeping with their cultural or religious practices, or it is generally not to their liking. It is for these reasons that Article 26 requires that account be taken of the prisoners’ habitual diet.[23] This means that the Detaining Power must endeavour to know what food the prisoners usually eat and, where possible, to provide that food. Doing so may be an element of humane treatment. Furthermore, it would clearly have the benefit of encouraging the prisoners to eat, thereby maintaining their weight and nutrition at healthy levels, and of improving their morale. Article 26(4) further contributes to these aims by requiring the Detaining Power to involve the prisoners of war in the preparation of their own meals, where possible, since this will likely result in meals that reflect their habitual diet.
2122  To meet its obligation to provide basic rations that are sufficient in quantity and quality, and to determine the content of the prisoners’ habitual diet, the Detaining Power may consult the prisoners’ representative.[24] It may also seek the advice of organizations such as the ICRC, local health bodies and non-governmental organizations. Such entities will not only have information concerning the relative availability of local food but are more than likely able to give advice on preparing food so that it is consistent with the prisoners’ cultural and religious practices. The Detaining Power may also consider, where possible, permitting cooks from the prisoners’ State of origin to prepare their meals.[25] Another way of complying with the obligation is to involve the prisoners in the preparation of their own meals.[26]
2123  While not explicitly covered by Article 26, it would be reasonable for the Detaining Power to establish set mealtimes and an acceptable period between meals. In that case, taking account of the ‘habitual diet’ of the prisoners logically extends to the timing of their meals, particularly where this reflects religious considerations.[27] One example encountered by the ICRC is the alteration of mealtimes for Muslim prisoners of war wishing to fast during Ramadan.
2124  Regulations should also deal with what sort of supplementary food the prisoners may receive and what may be withheld or otherwise restricted, for example for sanitary reasons, such as to prevent food contamination or the spread of disease.
2125  Importantly, the prisoners’ habitual diet may never be used as a justification for providing an inadequate quantity or quality of food or water. Thus, the Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission held that Ethiopia was liable for ‘providing Eritrean prisoners of war prior to December 2000 [with] a diet that was seriously deficient in nutrition’,[28] notwithstanding that Ethiopia argued that the diet reflected the normal diet of most Eritreans.[29]
Back to top
D. Paragraph 2: Additional rations for prisoners who work
2126  Where prisoners of war carry out physical work, they are to be provided with additional rations to permit them to remain in good health. For the allocation of additional rations, the type of work and not the output must be considered; in no circumstances may the Detaining Power use additional rations to put pressure on prisoners to increase output.[30] The relevant factor in determining whether prisoners are entitled to additional rations is the effect of the work on their physiological needs, such as calorie consumption.
2127  Article 51(1) reinforces this obligation by specifying that, especially as regards food, prisoners of war who work must be granted conditions not inferior to those enjoyed by nationals of the Detaining Power employed in similar work.[31]
Back to top
E. Paragraph 3: Drinking water and tobacco
1. Drinking water
2128  Prisoners of war must be supplied with drinking water of sufficient quantity and quality to maintain them in good health.[32] Prisoners must have access to drinking water 24 hours a day.[33] The WHO estimates that a person requires between 2.5 and 3 litres of drinking water per day under most conditions.[34] Dehydration can lead to severe illness and may in some cases be fatal. Deliberately denying prisoners access to sufficient drinking water may amount to a grave breach of the Convention.[35]
2129  In situations where prisoners of war carry out physical labour, or in hot climates, it is logical that the drinking water requirements of the prisoners will increase, and the Detaining Power must provide the appropriate amount of water. A prisoner’s state of health may also lead to an increased need for water.
2130  The Detaining Power must also ensure that the water provided is drinkable, for example that it is not contaminated[36] or too hot to relieve thirst. Filtration and disinfection with agents such as chlorine may be required to render water safe for drinking.
Back to top
2. Tobacco
2131  Article 26(3) permits the use of tobacco;[37] however, the hazards of such use are today commonly known. The Detaining Power may impose restrictions on tobacco use in prisoner-of-war camps in order to ensure a healthy environment for everyone in the camp.[38] Some Detaining Powers may have commitments under domestic legislation or international instruments to, for example, protect others against passive smoking or restrict access of tobacco to minors.[39] Protection against passive smoking may require proper ventilation, access to the open air and the dissemination of information about the health hazards of smoking. While perhaps outdated, paragraph 3 nonetheless reflects the interest of maintaining prisoners’ morale during their internment.
2132  In some cultures, tobacco use remains an important part of daily life, and while there is no obligation to supply tobacco to prisoners, making tobacco products available in the canteen should be considered (see Article 28). In conflicts since 1949, the ICRC has observed that that tobacco use was generally permitted in prisoner-of-war camps, and at times the Detaining Power even provided a daily ration of cigarettes.
2133  In summary, if tobacco is available to prisoners of war, then they should be permitted to use it, subject to reasonable restrictions relating to passive smoking, fire risk and effective and efficient camp administration.
Back to top
F. Paragraph 4: Preparation of food
2134  The requirement that prisoners of war be, as far as possible, associated with the preparation of their meals, including in the selection of ingredients, reflects the importance recognized by the Convention of allowing them a certain degree of self-organization and responsibility. It also acknowledges the reality that the prisoners are less likely to reject food they have prepared themselves. Furthermore, where there are religious or cultural considerations, engaging the prisoners in the preparation of their meals is a way for the Detaining Power to ensure respect for their habitual diets. Prisoners of war would be more comfortable eating knowing that the food was prepared according to their cultural or religious precepts. Any work carried out by prisoners in preparing or cooking their meals must comply with the provisions concerning the labour of prisoners of war in Section III of the Convention.
2135  In recent armed conflicts, the ICRC has observed that Detaining Powers have endeavoured to ensure that prisoners of war are involved in food preparation, including by engaging them as cooks in the kitchen and, as noted above (see para. 2117 of this commentary), by providing them with the space and facilities to cultivate vegetables. Where involvement in all stages of the process is not (yet) possible, alternative measures – such as allowing prisoners to add their own salt or spices – must be considered.
2136  Giving prisoners of war ‘the means to prepare any additional food in their possession’ entails allowing them the use of a kitchen, equipped with suitable utensils and storage facilities. Such facilities should allow prisoners of war to prepare their food while abiding by basic standards of food hygiene. ‘[A]dditional food in their possession’ includes any that they have grown themselves or received by means of parcels or collective shipments.[40]
2137  The requirement to permit prisoners of war to be associated with the preparation of their meals is conditioned by the term ‘as far as possible’. Potential limitations could be based on health or sanitary considerations or on concerns about camp security or the safety of the guards. For example, the Detaining Power may establish restrictions and standards concerning how the food is stored and prepared or on the use of fires or knives and other specific cooking utensils (see para. 2141 of this commentary).
Back to top
G. Paragraph 5: Premises
2138  A mess refers to ‘a place in which members of the armed forces take their meals’,[41] hence ‘messing’. ‘Adequate premises’ implies premises which protect prisoners of war from the elements and enable them to take their meals in conditions to which they are accustomed. In addition to a dining room, such premises may include a kitchen, food-storage facilities, cooking utensils, crockery, fuel and cleaning products. All such premises must meet the requirements of Article 25(3).
2139  Facilities associated with the storage, preparation and consumption of food must be hygienic and protected from the elements, pests and vermin.[42] Where dedicated eating facilities are not (yet) available, it may – depending on contextual factors such as climate and space – be acceptable that prisoners have the option of eating either in their dormitories or outdoors in the yard.
2140  Articles 44(3) and 45(2) set out rules relating to the supervision of the mess.
Back to top
H. Paragraph 6: Collective disciplinary measures
2141  In keeping with the prohibition of collective punishments and with the obligation to ensure the good health of prisoners of war, collective disciplinary measures that affect the food of prisoners of war are not permitted. The wording of Article 26(6) is broad in that it prohibits any collective disciplinary measures ‘affecting food’. This includes, for example, reducing food allowances to punish groups of prisoners for the alleged misconduct of one or some of them.[43] A textual interpretation would suggest that the prohibition also includes preventing prisoners’ involvement in the preparation of meals. However, this does not apply to situations where it is necessary to adjust the food preparation process for genuine health, logistical or security reasons. For instance, if the involvement of the prisoners is compromising food safety standards, and this could not be rectified through training or instruction, then the Detaining Power would be obliged to take remedial action, including, where necessary, by adjusting the prisoners’ involvement. Similarly, if kitchen implements such as knives or other sharp objects create a security concern, the Detaining Power would be entitled to take remedial action, including limiting the involvement of the prisoners in the preparation process. The key point is that the measures taken to address an issue may not be punitive in nature, but rather intended to correct the problem.
2142  While Article 26(6) speaks only of collective disciplinary measures, the Convention also prohibits individual disciplinary measures affecting food that are dangerous to a prisoner’s health.[44] Individual disciplinary punishments may only discontinue privileges that have been granted over and above the treatment provided for by the Convention.[45]
2143  In some situations, Detaining Powers have used measures affecting food and water to secure obedience with camp orders. For example, in Korea in 1952, ‘in order to move recalcitrant Communist prisoners of war to smaller, more manageable, prisoner-of-war compounds where control by the Detaining Power could be re-established, the military authorities of the United Nations Command made food available in the new, small compounds and refused to make it available in the old, large compounds’.[46] Since food was made available in the newer compounds, and prisoners were free to move to these, the UN Command considered that a denial of food had not taken place.[47] The ICRC, on the other hand, held that this constituted a collective disciplinary measure involving food.[48] Some authors have taken the view that such measures, although carrying the risk of abuse, may be employed if the ICRC has access to supervise the situation in the prisoner-of-war camps.[49]
Back to top
Select bibliography
Bretonnière, Maurice, L’application de la Convention de Genève aux prisonniers français en Allemagne durant la seconde guerre mondiale (typewritten thesis), Paris, 1949.
Krähenmann, Sandra, ‘Protection of Prisoners in Armed Conflict’, in Dieter Fleck (ed.), The Handbook of International Humanitarian Law, 3rd edition, Oxford University Press, 2013, pp. 359–411, at 395–396.
Levie, Howard S., Prisoners of War in International Armed Conflict, International Law Studies, U.S. Naval War College, Vol. 59, 1978, pp. 126–130.
Sanna, Silvia, ‘Treatment of Prisoners of War’, in Andrew Clapham, Paola Gaeta and Marco Sassòli (eds), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary, Oxford University Press, 2015, pp. 977–1011.

1 - For a general discussion of the principle of assimilation, see Introduction, section A.3.c.
2 - Hague Convention (II) (1899), Article 7, and Hague Regulations (1907), Article 7. The 1907 text is worded slightly differently but is substantively the same as that of the 1899 Convention, which is quoted here.
3 - Hague Regulations (1907), Article 7(2).
4 - The term ‘depot’ refers to ‘a place where recruits are trained or troops assembled’; Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 12th edition, Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 385.
5 - Report of the Conference of Government Experts of 1947, p. 138. See also Levie, p. 126.
6 - Krähenmann, p. 395.
7 - Levie, p. 127, fn. 106.
8 - See, generally, Levie, pp. 126–127.
9 - Report of the Conference of Government Experts of 1947, p. 139. For more detail concerning the discussions surrounding the use of the calories test to judge whether food rations are sufficient to keep a prisoner of war in good health, see Minutes of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949, Committee II, Vol. II, 25th meeting, pp. 46–47.
10 - Report of the Conference of Government Experts of 1947, p. 139.
11 - Ibid.
12 - See Final Record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949, Vol. II-A, pp. 256–258.
13 - Ibid.
14 - See Article 16.
15 - See Article 130. Furthermore, the ICTY found that a wilful deprivation of food and water intended to cause serious bodily harm leading to the deaths of prisoners constitutes wilful killing and inhuman treatment; Prlić Trial Judgment, 2013, Vol. 3, paras 68–72, 218–222, 744–745 and 1144–1150.
16 - See ICRC Study on Customary International Humanitarian Law (2005), Rule 118.
17 - See e.g. World Health Organization (WHO), Healthy Diet, Factsheet No. 394, 30 August 2018, and Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases: Report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation, WHO Technical Report Series 916, 4 March 2003; and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Human Energy Requirements: Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation, FAO, Rome, 2004.
18 - See also Article 30(1).
19 - See para. 2113 of this commentary. The reality is that prisoners will often be served the same or similar rations as the Detaining Power’s own troops. These rations will include calorific content but may not include all the necessary nutrients.
20 - For a further discussion of hunger strikes, see the commentary on Article 15, para. 1733.
21 - See e.g. New Zealand, Military Manual, 2019, Vol. 4, p. 12-15, para. 12.3.14; Philippines, LOAC Teaching File, 2006, p. 23-7. See also Introduction, para. 114, and the commentaries on Article 12, para. 1526, and on Article 15, para. 1721; Levie, pp. 127–128; Ryan Goodman and Derek Jinks, ‘International Law, U.S. War Powers, and the Global War on Terrorism’, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 118, No. 8, June 2005, pp. 2653–2662, at 2660–2661; and Sanna, p. 986.
22 - See the commentary on Article 9, section C.4.b (in particular para. 1357).
23 - See e.g. Canada, Prisoner of War Handling Manual, 2004, p. 3F-10, para. 3F11(2). Ration scales are to be tailored, as far as is possible, to the national dietary requirements of PW, bearing in mind that a diet which is totally suited to PW from one nation may be inadequate or unsuitable for those from a different nation. There may also be religious or ethnic dietary requirements for which, whenever possible, provision should be made. See also Belgium, Law of Armed Conflict Training Manual, 2009, Part 4, p. 18; Netherlands, Military Manual, 2005, para. 726; Switzerland, Basic Military Manual, 1987, p. 28, Article 102; United Kingdom, Joint Doctrine Captured Persons, 2015, p. 2-5, para. 211(b); United States, Army Regulation on Enemy Prisoners, Retained Personnel, Civilian Internees and Other Detainees, 1997, para. F; and New Zealand, Military Manual, 2019, Vol. 4, p. 12-49, para. 12.10.47(b).
24 - For more on prisoners’ representatives, see Articles 79–81.
25 - Agreement between the United States of America and Germany concerning Prisoners of War, Sanitary Personnel and Civilians (1918), Article 57.
26 - Another example observed by the ICRC of account being taken by the Detaining Power of prisoners’ customary diet was the provision of tea several times a day or of access by prisoners to their own tea-making facilities.
27 - See e.g. United Kingdom, Joint Doctrine Captured Persons, 2015, p. 2-5, para. 211(b), which provides that every prisoner is to receive three meals per 24-hour period and that mealtimes may be no closer together than four hours nor further apart than ten hours.
28 - Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, Prisoners of War, Eritrea’s Claim, Partial Award, 2003, para. 6.
29 - Ibid. para. 109.
30 - See Final Record of the Diplomatic Conference of Geneva of 1949, Vol. II-A, p. 257.
31 - See the commentary on Article 51, para. 2727. During the Second World War, prisoners often did not receive the extra rations granted to civilians engaged in similar work. See ICRC, Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross on its Activities during the Second World War (September 1, 1939–June 30, 1947), Volume I: General Activities, ICRC, Geneva, May 1948, pp. 335–337.
32 - For water-supply standards, see e.g. ICRC, Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Habitat in Prisons, ICRC, Geneva, 2013, chapter 2, and Water, Sanitation, Hygiene and Habitat in Prisons – Supplementary Guidance, ICRC, Geneva, 2012, chapter 4.
33 - See United Kingdom, Joint Doctrine Captured Persons, 2015, p. 2-6, para. 211(c), which states: ‘CPERS [captured persons] shall be provided with sufficient drinking water. They must have access to water at all times either on request or by default, where CPERS are given a supply to self-ration.’ See also Canada, Prisoner of War Handling Manual, 2004, p. 3F-10, para. 3F11(1), and United States, Law of War Manual, 2016, p. 568, para. 9.13.2.
34 - World Health Organization, How much water is needed in emergencies, Technical Notes on Drinking-Water, Sanitation and Hygiene in Emergencies, July 2013.
35 - See para. 2112 (fn. 15) of this commentary.
36 - Eritrea-Ethiopia Claims Commission, Prisoners of War, Eritrea’s Claim, Partial Award, 2003, para. 96.
37 - The manner of use is not specified. It may include use by smoking, chewing or as snuff.
38 - See United States, Law of War Manual, 2016, p. 568, para. 9.13.3.
39 - See e.g. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2003), Articles 6, 7, 8 and 16.
40 - Pursuant to Article 72(1), ‘[p]risoners of war shall be allowed to receive by post or by any other means individual parcels or collective shipments, containing, in particular, foodstuffs …’.
41 - Concise Oxford English Dictionary, 12th edition, Oxford University Press, 2011, p. 897.
42 - See Article 29(1).
43 - See Levie, pp. 129–130.
44 - Article 89(3).
45 - Article 89(1)(2). See also Krähenmann, p. 396, who notes that individual disciplinary measures may only affect ‘special privileges going beyond the scope of Article 26’.
46 - Levie, p. 130, fn. 115.
47 - Ibid.
48 - Ibid. See also Alton H. Harvey, ‘The Maintenance of Control over Prisoners of War’, Military Law and the Law of War Review, Vol. 2, 1963, pp. 127–148, at 143.
49 - Krähenmann, p. 396; Alton H. Harvey, ‘The Maintenance of Control over Prisoners of War’, Military Law and the Law of War Review, Vol. 2, 1963, pp. 127–148, at 143.