القاعدة ذات الصلة
Canada
Practice Relating to Rule 65. Perfidy
Section B. Killing, injuring or capturing an adversary by resort to perfidy
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) states: “It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture adversaries by resort to perfidy.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 6-2, § 8 (land warfare), p. 7-2, § 16 (air warfare) and p. 8-10, § 80 (naval warfare).
The manual further provides that “treacherously killing or wounding any individual belonging to the hostile nation or army” constitutes a war crime. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 16-3, § 20(b).
The manual also states:
Assassination is prohibited. Assassination means the killing or wounding of a selected non-combatant for a political or religious motive. It is not forbidden, however, to send a detachment or individual members of the armed forces to kill, by sudden attack, a person who is a combatant.
If prior information of an intended assassination should reach the party on whose behalf the act is to be committed, that party should make the utmost effort to prevent its being carried out.
It is forbidden to put a price on the head of an enemy individual or to offer a bounty for an enemy “dead or alive”. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 6-3, §§ 25–27.
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapters on land warfare, air warfare and naval warfare:
It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture adversaries by resort to perfidy. Acts inviting the confidence of adversaries and leading them to believe that they are entitled to protection or are obliged to grant protection under the LOAC, with intent to betray that confidence, constitute perfidy. In other words, perfidy consists of committing a hostile act under the cover of a legal protection. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, §§ 603.1 (land warfare), 706.1 (air warfare) and 857.1 (naval warfare).
[emphasis in original]
In the chapter on land warfare, the manual further states:
1. Assassination is prohibited. Assassination means the killing or wounding of a selected non-combatant for a political or religious motive. It is not forbidden, however, to send a detachment or individual members of the armed forces to kill, by sudden attack, a person who is a combatant.
2. If prior information of an intended assassination should reach the party on whose behalf the act is to be committed, that party should make the utmost effort to prevent its being carried out.
3. It is forbidden to put a price on the head of an enemy individual or to offer a bounty for an enemy “dead or alive.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 612.
In its chapter on “War crimes, individual criminal liability and command responsibility”, the manual states that “treacherously killing or wounding any individual belonging to the hostile nation or army” constitutes a war crime. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1609.2.b.
Canada’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act (2000) provides that the war crimes defined in Article 8(2) of the 1998 ICC Statute are “crimes according to customary international law” and, as such, indictable offences under the Act. 
Canada, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act, 2000, Section 4(1) and (4).
In 2013, in the Sapkota case, Canada’s Federal Court dismissed a request for review of a decision denying refugee protection to the applicant on grounds of complicity in crimes against humanity in Nepal between 1991 and 2009. While reviewing the submissions of the respondent, Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the Court stated: “The Respondent notes that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court … is endorsed in Canada as a source of customary law.” 
Canada, Federal Court, Sapkota case, Reasons for Judgment and Judgment, 15 July 2013, § 28.