Germany’s Military Manual (1992), in a chapter dealing with reprisals, referring to Article 33 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV and Articles 51 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, provides: “It is expressly prohibited by agreement to make reprisals against: … civilians … private property of civilians on occupied territory and of enemy foreigners on friendly territory.” 

Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) provides: “Reprisals are expressly prohibited against … the private property of civilians in occupied territories”. 

In 1990, during a parliamentary debate on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, a member of the German Parliament called the prohibition of reprisals as contained in the 1977 Additional Protocol I “newly introduced rules”. 

Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Germany stated:

Germany’s Military Manual (1992), referring to Article 46 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I, Article 47 of the 1949 Geneva Convention II and Article 20 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, provides: “It is expressly prohibited by agreement to make reprisals against: … medical facilities and supplies”. 

Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) provides: “Reprisals are expressly prohibited against … medical establishments and material”. 

In its judgment in the Dover Castle case in 1921, the German Reichsgericht held that the accused, the commander of a submarine from which a British hospital ship had been torpedoed, was in the circumstances of the case entitled to hold the opinion that the measures taken by the German authorities against foreign hospital ships were not contrary to international law but were legitimate reprisals. The accused had pleaded that in sinking the ship he had merely carried out an order of the German Admiralty, which, in the belief that the enemy utilized their hospital ships for military purposes in violation of the 1907 Hague Convention (X), issued a number of orders instructing the submarines to attack hospital ships as vessels of war. 

In 1990, during a parliamentary debate on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, a member of the German Parliament called the prohibition of reprisals as contained in the 1977 Additional Protocol I “newly introduced rules”. 

Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Germany declared:

Germany’s Soldiers’ Manual (1991) states: “Cultural property may never be made the object of reprisals.” 

Germany’s Military Manual (1992), referring to Articles 52(1) and 53(c) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, as well as to Article 4(4) of the 1954 Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property, provides: “It is expressly prohibited by agreement to make reprisals against: … cultural objects”. 

Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) provides: “Reprisals are expressly prohibited against … cultural property”. 

Germany’s Soldiers’ Manual (2006) states: “Cultural property may in no event be made the object of reprisals.” 

In 1990, during a parliamentary debate on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, a member of the German Parliament called the prohibition of reprisals as contained in the 1977 Additional Protocol I “newly introduced rules”. 

Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Germany declared:

In 1995, in response to a private inquiry, the Department of Legal Affairs of the German Ministry of Defence stated: “According to international conventional law, reprisals are expressly prohibited against … cultural property”. 

Germany’s Military Manual (1992), referring, however, to Article 55(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, provides: “It is expressly prohibited by agreement to make reprisals against: … objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population”. 

Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) provides: “Reprisals are expressly prohibited against … objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population”. 

In 1990, in a parliamentary debate on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, a member of the German Parliament called the prohibition of reprisals as contained in the Additional Protocol I “newly introduced rules”. 

Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Germany declared:

Germany’s Military Manual (1992), referring to Article 55(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, provides: “It is expressly prohibited by agreement to make reprisals against: … the natural environment.” 

Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) provides: “Reprisals are expressly prohibited against … the natural environment”. 

In 1990, in a parliamentary debate on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, a member of the German Parliament called the prohibition of reprisals as contained in the Additional Protocol I “newly introduced rules”. 

Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Germany declared:

Germany’s Military Manual (1992), referring to Article 56(4) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, provides: “It is expressly prohibited by agreement to make reprisals against: … works and installations containing dangerous forces”. 

Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) provides: “Reprisals are expressly prohibited against … works and installations which constitute a source of danger”. 

In 1990, in a parliamentary debate on the ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocols, a member of the German Parliament called the prohibition of reprisals as contained in the Additional Protocol I “newly introduced rules”. 

Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Germany declared: