Practice Relating to Rule 129. The Act of Displacement

Note: For practice concerning the removal of civilians from the vicinity of military objectives, see Rule 24. For practice concerning the establishment of hospital and safety zones, see Rule 35. For practice concerning the evacuation of children, see Rule 135, Section C.
Geneva Convention IV
Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The Parties to the conflict shall endeavour to conclude local agreements for the removal from besieged or encircled areas of wounded, sick, infirm, and aged persons … and maternity cases.” 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17.
Geneva Convention IV
Article 49, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “The Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 49, second para.
Additional Protocol II
Article 17(1) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides: “The displacement of the civilian population shall not be ordered for reasons related to the conflict unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
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 17(1). Article 17 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VII, CDDH/SR.53, 6 June 1977, p. 144.
ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(e)(viii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[o]rdering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand” constitutes a war crime in non-international armed conflicts. 
Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted by the UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, 17 July 1998, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9, Article 8(2)(e)(viii).
Kampala Convention
The 2009 Kampala Convention prohibits displacement of civilians in situations of armed conflict “unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand, in accordance with international humanitarian law”. 
African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa, adopted in Kampala, Uganda, 23 October 2009, Article 4(4)(b).
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement
The 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement provides:
Principle 6
2. The prohibition of arbitrary displacement includes displacement:
(b) in situations of armed conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand;
Principle 7
1. Prior to any decision requiring the displacement of persons, the authorities concerned shall ensure that all feasible alternatives are explored in order to avoid displacement altogether. Where no alternatives exist, all measures shall be taken to minimize displacement and its adverse effects. 
Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, presented to the UN Commission on Human Rights by the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2, 11 February 1998, Principles 6 and 7.
UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(e)(viii), “[o]rdering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand”, constitutes a war crime in non-international armed conflicts. 
Regulation on the Establishment of Panels with Exclusive Jurisdiction over Serious Criminal Offences, UN Doc. UNTAET/REG/2000/15, Dili, 6 June 2000, Section 6(1)(e)(viii).
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides: “The belligerents shall endeavour to conclude agreements for the removal from besieged areas of wounded, sick, elderly [and] maternity cases.” 
Argentina, Leyes de Guerra, RC-46-1, Público, II Edición 1969, Ejército Argentino, Edición original aprobado por el Comandante en Jefe del Ejército, 9 May 1967, § 1.014.
The manual further states:
Nevertheless, the occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. Evacuations may involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory only in case of material impossibility. 
Argentina, Leyes de Guerra, RC-46-1, Público, II Edición 1969, Ejército Argentino, Edición original aprobado por el Comandante en Jefe del Ejército, 9 May 1967, § 5.008.
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1989) provides that, with respect to non-international armed conflicts, “displacement of the population shall not be ordered unless their security or imperative military reasons so demand”. 
Argentina, Leyes de Guerra, PC-08-01, Público, Edición 1989, Estado Mayor Conjunto de las Fuerzas Armadas, aprobado por Resolución No. 489/89 del Ministerio de Defensa, 23 April 1990, § 7.08.
Australia
Australia’s Commanders’ Guide (1994) provides: “Belligerents shall endeavour to conclude local arrangements for the removal from besieged or encircled areas of wounded, sick, infirm and aged persons … and maternity cases.” 
Australia, Law of Armed Conflict, Commanders’ Guide, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 Supplement 1 – Interim Edition, 7 March 1994, § 926; see also Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 735.
Australia
Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states that, in the context of siege warfare:
The opposing parties are required to try and conclude local agreements for the removal from besieged or encircled areas of wounded, sick, infirm and aged persons, children and maternity cases, and for the passage of ministers of all religions, medical personnel and medical equipment on their way to such areas. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 7.38.
The LOAC Manual (2006) replaces both the Defence Force Manual (1994) and the Commanders’ Guide (1994).
Brazil
Brazil’s Operations Manual for the Evacuation of Non-Combatants (2007) states:
1.2.1 Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations are conducted by the Ministry of Defence, upon request by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the evacuation of non-combatants whose lives are in danger, from their host country to a safe place of destination …
3.1.2 … [A] Non-Combatant Evacuation Operation shall aim to achieve the following objectives:
a) to provide security and welfare by carrying out an evacuation to a safe place of destination;
b) to reduce to a minimum the number of citizens whose lives are at risk or who may be taken as hostages; and
c) to reduce to a minimum the number of citizens [who are present] in current or probable areas of combat.
3.4.1 Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations … may be triggered by sudden changes in the government of the host country, changes in its political or military orientation with regard to Brazil, or hostile threats to Brazilian citizens by internal or external forces in that country.
7.4.1 In case the Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not state who is to be evacuated with priority, the Joint Command shall follow this guidance:
b) the table below sets out who shall be evacuated with priority.
Main Categories
I – Brazilian citizens.
II – Non-Brazilians who are close relatives of Brazilian citizens.
III – Non-Brazilians working for the Brazilian government.
IV – Non-Brazilians who are seriously sick or wounded, or whose lives are in imminent danger.
V – Others (as indicated by the Ambassador or the Commander of the Joint Command).
Secondary Categories
A – Pregnant women.
B – Unaccompanied children (under 12 years of age).
C – The elderly (over 65 years of age).
D – Adults with children.
E – Adolescents (from 12 to 17 years of age).
F – Adults.
7.5.1 The safe place of destination is the place designated by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs where the evacuated persons shall be taken by the end of the Non-Combatant Evacuation. It shall preferably be situated in Brazil. 
Brazil, Manual de Operações de Evacuação de Não-Combatentes, Ministério da Defesa, Estado-Maior de Defesa, MD33-M-08, Ordinance No. 1351/EMD/MD of 11 October 2007, published in Diário Oficial da União, No. 198, 15 October 2007, §§ 1.2.1, 3.1.2, 3.4.1, 7.4.1(b) and 7.5.1.
The Operations Manual defines non-combatants as an “expression covering civilians and military [personnel], including non-essential military personnel, Brazilians, selected nationals of the host country and nationals of third countries who are to be evacuated in the execution of a Non-Combatant Evacuation.” 
Brazil, Manual de Operações de Evacuação de Não-Combatentes, Ministério da Defesa, Estado-Maior de Defesa, MD33-M-08, Ordinance No. 1351/EMD/MD of 11 October 2007, published in Diário Oficial da União, No. 198, 15 October 2007, Glossary, Part II.
The Operations Manual also states: “According to the policy of the Ministry of Defence, the principles of the Law of Armed Conflict regulate the actions taken by the Joint Command in the defence of its personnel, property and equipment.” 
Brazil, Manual de Operações de Evacuação de Não-Combatentes, Ministério da Defesa, Estado-Maior de Defesa, MD33-M-08, Ordinance No. 1351/EMD/MD of 11 October 2007, published in Diário Oficial da União, No. 198, 15 October 2007, Annex A, § 3.
Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states that “the Occupying Power has the following obligations: … to refrain from evacuating protected persons … of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible” to avoid such displacement. 
Burundi, Règlement n° 98 sur le droit international humanitaire, Ministère de la Défense Nationale et des Anciens Combattants, Projet “Moralisation” (BDI/B-05), August 2007, Part I bis, p. 108; see also Part I bis, p. 107.
Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (1992) provides: “Civilian populations must be evacuated to the non combat zones.” 
Cameroon, Droit international humanitaire et droit de la guerre, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les Forces Armées, Présidence de la République, Ministère de la Défense, Etat-major des Armées, Troisième Division, Edition 1992, p. 67, § 242(3).
Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides:
If circumstances permit, the parties to a conflict must endeavour to conclude local agreements for the removal from besieged areas of wounded, sick, infirm, and aged persons … and maternity cases. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 6-4, § 35.
The manual also states that in occupied territory, “permissible measures of population control include … evacuation”. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 12-5, § 40.
With respect to non-international armed conflicts in particular, the manual states: “It is forbidden to displace the civilian population for reasons connected with the conflict unless their security or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 17-5, § 41.
Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on land warfare:
If circumstances permit, the parties to a conflict must endeavour to conclude local agreements for the removal from besieged areas of wounded, sick, infirm, and aged persons, children and maternity cases. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 614.6.
In its chapter on rights and duties of occupying powers, the manual states:
1223. Control of Persons in Occupied Territory
2. Permissible measures of population control include:
b. evacuation. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1223.1 and 1223.2.b.
In its chapter on non-international armed conflicts, the manual states:
It is forbidden to displace the civilian population for reasons connected with the conflict unless their security or imperative military reasons so demand. If they do have to be displaced, arrangements must be made, if possible, for their shelter, hygiene, health, safety and nutrition. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1724.
Côte d’Ivoire
Côte d’Ivoire’s Teaching Manual (2007) provides in Book III, Volume 1 (Instruction of first-year trainee officers):
IV.3.3. Total or partial evacuation of the civilian population
With respect to evacuations, additional limitations apply in occupied territory. The occupying power can decide to evacuate totally or partially a given zone if the security of the population or imperative military necessity so demand. This not only applies in situations of siege, but also in any situation which can arise in occupied territory. These evacuations should not demand displacements beyond the boundaries of the occupied territory, except if for material reasons such displacement is impossible to avoid. Persons evacuated in this manner must be transferred back to their homes as soon as the hostilities in the zone concerned cease. 
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. 52; 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. 74.
Croatia
Croatia’s LOAC Compendium (1991) allows “evacuation for security reasons”, but “not outside the boundaries of the occupied territory”. 
Croatia, Compendium “Law of Armed Conflicts”, Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, 1991, p. 62.
Dominican Republic
The Dominican Republic’s Military Manual (1980) provides: “It is lawful to displace or resettle civilians if it is urgently required for military reasons, such as clearing a combat zone.” 
Dominican Republic, La Conducta en Combate según las Leyes de la Guerra, Escuela Superior de las FF. AA. “General de Brigada Pablo Duarte”, Secretaría de Estado de las Fuerzas Armadas, May 1980, p. 10.
France
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) provides: “Some evacuations can be imposed for reasons of security of the population or imperative military necessity. These evacuations must always be temporary and undertaken respecting the population’s interests.” 
France, 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, p. 65.
Germany
Germany’s Military Manual (1992) provides:
A temporary evacuation of certain areas shall be permissible if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand. An evacuation of persons to areas outside the bounds of the occupied territory shall be permitted only in case of emergency. 
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, § 544.
Hungary
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) allows “evacuation for security reasons”, but “not outside the boundaries of the occupied territory”. 
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 98.
Ireland
Ireland’s Basic LOAC Guide (2005) states:
[T]he civilian population may not be compelled to remain in a dangerous military area except where they would meet a greater danger by moving elsewhere; or a move cannot be allowed because it would interfere seriously with military operations (e.g. there are urgent military reasons for keeping the roads open). … Additionally, civilians may be temporarily evacuated for imperative military reasons or their own safety if the evacuation can be safely done. 
Ireland, Basic Guide to the Law of Armed Conflict, TP/TRG/01-2005, Director of Defence Forces Training, Department of Defence, July 2005, p. 11.
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) provides: “It is obligatory to make an effort to evacuate citizens from military objectives to get them out of harm’s way.” 
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, p. 57.
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states: “Civilians must be removed from military targets so that they will not be harmed.” 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 36.
The Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) is a second edition of the Manual on the Laws of War (1998).
Italy
Italy’s IHL Manual (1991) provides that it is possible to undertake “total or partial evacuation of a given area of the occupied territory if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand”. 
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, § 48(8).
Kenya
Kenya’s LOAC Manual (1997) provides: “A local cease-fire may be arranged for the removal from the besieged or encircled areas of the wounded and sick, … old persons and maternity cases. Evacuation can also be ordered for military reasons or for the security of the population.” 
Kenya, Law of Armed Conflict, Military Basic Course (ORS), 4 Précis, The School of Military Police, 1997, Précis No. 4, p. 5.
Madagascar
Madagascar’s Military Manual (1994) provides: “Local agreements may be concluded for the removal from besieged or encircled areas of wounded, sick and shipwrecked.” 
Madagascar, Le Droit des Conflits Armés, Ministère des Forces Armées, August 1994, Fiche No. 7-SO, § B.
Mexico
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009), in a section on the 1949 Geneva Convention IV, states: “This Convention includes provisions for the parties to a conflict to make local agreements for the evacuation of wounded, sick, disabled and elderly people … from besieged or encircled areas”. 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 209.
Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands provides: “The occupying power may undertake the evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. VIII-5, § 5.
With respect to non-international armed conflicts in particular, the manual states: “Forced displacement … is only authorized if the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. XI-7.
Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states that “the occupier may evacuate an area if the security of the population or compelling military reasons so require”. 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0832.
In its chapter on non-international armed conflict, the manual states:
In principle, forced displacement of civilians (the civilian population) is prohibited. It is permitted only if the safety of the affected civilians or compelling military reasons dictate. Civilians may not be forced to leave their locality for reasons relating to internal armed conflict. Although it is permitted temporarily to evacuate civilians, it is prohibited to move them for reasons relating to race, skin colour, religion or belief, gender, birth or social status or any other such criterion. 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 1040.
New Zealand
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) provides that in occupied territory, “permissible measures of population control include … evacuation”. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 1322(2).
With respect to non-international armed conflicts in particular, the manual states: “It is forbidden to displace the civilian population for reasons connected with the conflict, unless their security or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 1823.
The manual refers to Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV, which requires that “belligerents endeavour to conclude local agreements for the removal from besieged or encircled areas of wounded, sick, infirm and aged persons … and maternity cases”. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 508(3).
Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the occupying power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement.
Persons thus evacuated must be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 62.b.
The manual also states that war crimes include the “unlawful deportation or transfer of a protected person”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 31.a.(6).
The manual further states: “The occupying power must not detain the inhabitants of the occupied territory in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war, unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 62.a.
Peru
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states:
Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the occupying power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.
Nevertheless, the Occupying Power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.
Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement.
Persons thus evacuated must be transferred back to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area in question have ceased. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 63(b), p. 266.
The manual also states that war crimes include the “unlawful deportation or transfer of a protected person”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 32(a)(6), p. 248.
The manual further states: “The occupying power must not detain the inhabitants of the occupied territory in an area particularly exposed to the dangers of war, unless the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 63(a), p. 265.
Philippines
The Military Directive to Commanders (1988) of the Philippines provides: “Emphasis should be placed on shelter or stay-put policy rather than on evacuation … Official orders to move large groups of civilians normally will be given where serious combat action is expected to occur between troops and hostile forces.” 
Philippines, Protection and Rehabilitation of Innocent Civilians Affected by AFP Counterinsurgency Operations, Directive to Commanders of Major Services and Area Commands, Office of the Chief of Staff, General Headquarters of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, Ministry of National Defense, 15 July 1988, Article 3(c).
Philippines
The Philippines’ AFP Standing Rules of Engagement (2005) states:
8. General Rules for the Correct Use of Force towards Mission Accomplishment
d. Commanders must be aware of, and sensitive to, the points stated in the definition of strategic implications of tactical operations. In particular, military operations shall be conducted in a manner that shall entail:
2) Minimum evacuation from homes and/or areas of food production. 
Philippines, AFP Standing Rules of Engagement, Armed Forces of the Philippines, General Headquarters, Office of the Chief of Staff, 1 December 2005, § 8(d)(2).
Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) states:
Deportation of the civilian population from the occupied territory to the territory of another state shall be prohibited. Temporary evacuation of civilians deep into the occupied territory may be permitted if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand, except for cases when this is not possible. 
Russian Federation, Regulations on the Application of International Humanitarian Law by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation, Moscow, 8 August 2001, § 75.
With regard to internal armed conflict, the Regulations states: “The displacement of the civilian population shall not be ordered for reasons related to the conflict unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Russian Federation, Regulations on the Application of International Humanitarian Law by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation, Moscow, 8 August 2001, § 85.
South Africa
South Africa’s LOAC Teaching Manual (2008) states:
Establishment and Protection of Protected Zones
Co-operation with Civilian Authorities. Belligerent Parties have a duty to cooperate with civilian authorities to aim at ensuring the survival of the civilian population with the least possible civilian casualties and damage, e.g. by taking safeguarding measures in favour of the population such as warning, provision of shelter, evacuation, information on dangerous areas, etc. 
South Africa, Advanced Law of Armed Conflict Teaching Manual, School of Military Justice, 1 April 2008, as amended to 25 October 2013, Learning Unit 3, pp. 189–190.
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides: “The occupying Power can undertake a total or partial evacuation of a given occupied area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
Spain, Orientaciones. El Derecho de los Conflictos Armados, Publicación OR7-004, 2 Tomos, aprobado por el Estado Mayor del Ejército, Division de Operaciones, 18 March 1996, Vol. I, § 5.5.c.(5); see also 2.4.a.(5).
The manual adds:
Evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. 
Spain, Orientaciones. El Derecho de los Conflictos Armados, Publicación OR7-004, 2 Tomos, aprobado por el Estado Mayor del Ejército, Division de Operaciones, 18 March 1996, Vol. I, § 5.5.c.(5).
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states:
The occupying power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or imperative military reasons requires such action.
Such evacuations may not involve the displacement of protected persons outside the bounds of the occupied territory except when for material reasons it is impossible to avoid such displacement. 
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, § 5.5.c.(5); see also § 2.4.a.(5).
Sweden
Sweden’s IHL Manual (1991) provides:
The only circumstances under which the occupying power has the right to order removal of the civilian population is when evacuation is required to protect civilians from military attack, or when civilian safety otherwise requires this. 
Sweden, International Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflict, with reference to the Swedish Total Defence System, Swedish Ministry of Defence, January 1991, Section 6.1.3, p. 122.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) provides: “Belligerents shall conclude special agreements in order to evacuate the wounded, sick, infirm, elderly … and maternity cases … from besieged areas.” 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 33.
The manual states, however:
A total or partial evacuation of a given occupied area may be undertaken if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand … In principle, such transfers must only take place within the occupied territory. 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 176.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides:
The Occupant … is permitted to undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area, but only if the security of the population or imperative military reasons so require. Except when any other course is materially impossible, such evacuation must not involve the transfer of protected persons outside the limits of occupied territory. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 560.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Pamphlet (1981) provides:
A local cease-fire may be arranged for the removal from besieged or encircled areas of the wounded and sick, … old persons and maternity cases. Evacuations can also be ordered for military reasons or for the security of the population. 
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 9, p. 34, § 3.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states in its chapter on occupied territory:
11.55. The occupying power is forbidden to transfer forcibly or deport protected persons from an occupied country either to its own territory or to that of any other state … An area may be totally or partially evacuated by the occupying power if:
a. such evacuation is required either for the security of the population or for reasons of imperative military necessity; and
b. protected persons are not moved outside occupied territory, unless there is no alternative; and
c. the evacuees are returned to their homes as soon as hostilities in the area have ceased; and
d. to the greatest extent practicable:
(1) proper accommodation is provided, and
(2) movement takes place under satisfactory conditions of hygiene, health, safety and nutrition, and
(3) members of the same family are not separated; and
e. the protecting power is informed of transfers and evacuations as soon as they have taken place.
11.55.1. Unlawful deportation or transfer is a grave breach of the [1949 Fourth Geneva] Convention. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, §§ 11.55–11.55.1 11 .
In its chapter on internal armed conflict, the manual states:
15.14. It is prohibited to order the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand.
5.14.1. It may be necessary to evacuate civilians temporarily from areas of danger, from encircled areas or for the better conduct of military operations. It is prohibited to move them for reasons based on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth or any similar criteria or in order to shield military targets from attack. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, §§ 15.14.–15.14.1.
United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) reproduces Articles 17 and 49 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV. 
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, §§ 256 and 382.
United States of America
The US Air Force Pamphlet (1976) refers to Articles 17 and 49 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV. 
United States, Air Force Pamphlet 110-31, International Law – The Conduct of Armed Conflict and Air Operations, US Department of the Air Force, 1976, §§ 14–3 and 14-6(b).
United States of America
The US Soldier’s Manual (1984) provides: “It is lawful to move or resettle civilians if it is urgently required for military reasons, such as clearing a combat zone.” 
United States, Your Conduct in Combat under the Law of War, Publication No. FM 27-2, Headquarters Department of the Army, Washington, November 1984, p. 22.
Argentina
Argentina’s Constitution (1994), as well as a number of decrees issued between 1974 and 1977, authorize the President, in cases where a state of emergency has been declared, to arrest and transfer persons from one part of the territory to another, unless such persons choose instead to leave the country. In some cases, however, the option to leave the country may be suspended by invoking the need to safeguard essential State interests. 
Argentina, Constitution, 1994, Article 23; Decree on the State of Emergency, 1974, Article 1; Decree on the State of Emergency, 1975, Article 1-4; Decree on the State of Emergency, 1976, Article 3; Law on the State of Emergency, 1977, Article 10.
Australia
Australia’s ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act (2002) incorporates in the Criminal Code the war crimes defined in the 1998 ICC Statute, including ordering the “displacement of a civilian population” in non-international armed conflicts, if “the order is not justified by the security of the civilians involved or by imperative military necessity”. 
Australia, ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act, 2002, Schedule 1, § 268.89.
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan’s Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War (1995) provides that, in international and non-international armed conflicts, “urgent measures to remove all the civilian persons from the besieged zone” must be taken. 
Azerbaijan, Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War, 1995, Article 15.
Burundi
Burundi’s Penal Code (2009) states:
“War crimes” means crimes which are committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes, in particular:
5. … [S]erious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
8°. Ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand. 
Burundi, Penal Code, 2009, Article (5)(8°).
Canada
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).
Congo
The Congo’s Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act (1998) defines war crimes with reference to the categories of crimes defined in Article 8 of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
Congo, Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act, 1998, Article 4.
Cuba
Cuba’s National Defence Act (1994), which governs civil defence activities for the protection of the civilian population, provides for the evacuation of the population to zones of safety. 
Cuba, National Defence Act, 1994, Article 116.
Denmark
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (1973), as amended in 1978, provides:
Any person who uses war instruments or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or the general rules of international law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. a fine, lenient imprisonment or up to 12 years’ imprisonment]. 
Denmark, Military Criminal Code, 1973, as amended in 1978, § 25(1).
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (2005) provides:
Any person who deliberately uses war means [“krigsmiddel”] or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or international customary law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. imprisonment up to life imprisonment]. 
Denmark, Military Criminal Code, 2005, § 36(2).
France
France’s Penal Code (1992), as amended in 2010, states in its section on war crimes related to non-international armed conflict: “Unless the security of the civilians or imperative military reasons so demand, ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict is punishable by life imprisonment.” 
France, Penal Code, 1994, as amended in 2010, Article 461-30.
Ireland
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, provides that any “minor breach” of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including violations of Article 78(1), as well as any “contravention” of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, including violations of Article 17(1), are punishable offences. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).
Netherlands
The Population Evacuation Act (1988) of the Netherlands provides that in the event of war or threat of war, a Royal Decree may be issued entitling government ministers to order the evacuation of the population in order to ensure its safety, ensure the continued functioning of society or to enable the armed forces to perform their tasks. 
Netherlands, Population Evacuation Act, 1988, Article 2(1).
New Zealand
Under New Zealand’s International Crimes and ICC Act (2000), war crimes include the crimes defined in Article 8(2)(e)(viii) of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
New Zealand, International Crimes and ICC Act, 2000, Section 11(2).
Norway
Norway’s Military Penal Code (1902), as amended in 1981, provides:
Anyone who contravenes or is accessory to the contravention of provisions relating to the protection of persons or property laid down in … the two additional protocols to [the 1949 Geneva] Conventions … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108(b).
Peru
Peru’s Constitution (1993) authorizes the restriction or suspension of, inter alia, freedom of movement during “states of emergency” (cases of disturbance of the peace or internal order, of disasters, or serious circumstances affecting the life of the nation), but banishment remains prohibited at all times. During “states of siege” (cases of invasion, external war, civil war or imminent danger), on the other hand, fundamental rights cannot be suspended. 
Peru, Constitution, 1993, Article 137.
Rwanda
The Report on the Practice of Rwanda states that Rwanda’s State of Emergency Decree (1959) provides that the authorities may order the evacuation of the civilian population for security reasons and fix the modalities of their evacuation. 
Report on the Practice of Rwanda, 1997, Chapter 1.7, referring to State of Emergency Decree, 1959, Article 4.
South Africa
South Africa’s ICC Act (2002) reproduces the war crimes listed in the 1998 ICC Statute, including in non-international armed conflicts: “ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or imperative military reasons so demand”. 
South Africa, ICC Act, 2002, Schedule 1, Part 3, § (e)(viii).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Under the UK ICC Act (2001), it is a punishable offence to commit a war crime as defined in Article 8(2)(e)(viii) of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
United Kingdom, ICC Act, 2001, Sections 50(1) and 51(1) (England and Wales) and Section 58(1) (Northern Ireland).
Uruguay
Uruguay’s Constitution (1996), as amended, provides that the President of the Republic may take prompt security measures in serious and unforeseen cases of foreign attack or internal disturbance, including the transfer of persons from one point of the territory to another, unless they choose to leave the country. 
Uruguay, Constitution, 1996, as amended, Article 168(17).
Canada
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.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
In June 1992, the Presidency of the Republika Srpska of Bosnia and Herzegovina appealed that the civilian population be displaced only if imperative military or security reasons so demanded. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republika Srpska, Appeal by the Presidency, 7 June 1992, § 4.
Germany
In 2005, in its Seventh Human Rights Policy Report submitted to the Bundestag (Lower House of Parliament), Germany’s Federal Government stated:
With the 1998 guidelines on the handling of crises related to internally displaced persons (“Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement”) by the then Representative of the UN Secretary-General on the Human Rights of Internally Displaced Persons, Francis Deng, the international community has a practice-oriented document, which summarizes existing standards on the protection of internally displaced persons and gives further recommendations. Although these guiding principles are not a binding instrument under international law, their acceptance by States, international organizations and NGOs has continued to grow over the past years, so that now they are virtually regarded as customary international law. 
Germany, Federal Government, Seventh Human Rights Policy Report, 17 June 2005, pp. 97–98.
India
In 2009, in a statement during a debate in the Lower House of Parliament (Lok Sabha) on the situation in Sri Lanka, India’s Minister of External Affairs and Minister of Finance stated:
A serious source of concern to us has been the condition of the civilians and internally displaced persons (IDPs), mostly Tamil, caught up in the zone of conflict. Estimates on the number of civilians trapped vary, but 70,000 or so are estimated to be there now. …
The Government of India is ready to facilitate the evacuation of civilians trapped in the area of conflict, working with the Government of Sri Lanka and the ICRC who would take responsibility for the security, screening and rehabilitation of these internally displaced persons. 
India, Statement by the Minister of External Affairs and Minister of Finance during a debate in the Lower House of Parliament (Lok Sabha) on the situation in Sri Lanka, 18 February 2009.
Malaysia
It has been reported that during the communist insurgency in Malaysia, squatters of Chinese origin who farmed the land on the edge of the jungle were resettled to areas called “New Villages”. 
See, e.g., Dato’ J. J. Raj, Jr., The War Years and After: A Personal Account of Historical Relevance, Pelanduk Publications, Kuala Lumpur, 1995, pp. 93–99.
According to the Report on the Practice of Malaysia, this was done both for security objectives and for the protection of the squatters and has been recognized by officials as a form of displacement. 
Report on the Practice of Malaysia, 1997, Interview with the Ministry of Home Affairs, Chapter 5.5.
Turkey
Under Turkish emergency decrees dating from 1990, the Emergency Governor can order the temporary or permanent evacuation, change of place, regrouping of villages, grazing fields and residential areas for reasons of public security. 
Turkey, Decrees No. 424 and 425, 10 May 1990.
UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights (Special Rapporteur)
In 1997, in his final report submitted to the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfer, including the Implantation of Settlers and Settlements proposed a draft declaration on population transfer and the implantation of settlers for adoption by the UN Commission on Human Rights. Article 4(3) of the draft declaration provided: “The displacement of the population or parts thereof shall not be ordered, induced or carried out unless their safety or imperative military reasons so demand.” 
UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights Dimensions of Population Transfer, including the Implantation of Settlers and Settlements, Final report, UN Doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/23, 27 June 1997, Annex II, Draft declaration on population transfer and the implantation of settlers, Article 4(3).
European Parliament
In a resolution adopted in 1985 in response to mass transfers of the population in Ethiopia, the European Parliament invited the Commission, the Council and member States to ask Ethiopia to put a stop to the transfers for a minimum of six months in order to assess under international supervision the degree of necessity for such actions and to establish minimum humanitarian conditions for their conduct should they prove necessary. 
European Parliament, Resolution on mass transfers of population in Ethiopia and the expulsion of Médecins sans frontières, 13 December 1985, § 1.
No data.
Human Rights Committee
In its concluding observations on the consolidated second and third periodic reports of the Philippines in 2003, the Human Rights Committee stated:
The Committee is concerned at continuing reports of displacement of persons and evacuation of populations, including indigenous population groups, in areas of counterinsurgency operations.
The State party should take urgent measures to ensure the protection of civilians in areas affected by military operations, in accordance with its human rights obligations. 
Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the consolidated second and third periodic reports of the Philippines, UN Doc. CCPR/CO/79/PHL, 1 December 2003, § 15.
[emphasis in original]
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that “the occupying power may undertake total or partial evacuation of a given area if the security of the population or other imperative reasons so demand”. 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 834.
Council of Delegates (1991)
At its Budapest Session in 1991, the Council of Delegates adopted a resolution on the protection of the civilian population against famine in situations of armed conflict in which it reminded “the authorities concerned and the armed forces under their command of their obligation to apply international humanitarian law, in particular … the prohibition on displacing civilians unless their security or imperative military reasons so demand”. 
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, Council of Delegates, Budapest Session, 28–30 November 1991, Res. 13, § 1.
ICRC
In 1997, in a working paper on war crimes submitted to the Preparatory Committee for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, the ICRC, emphasizing the customary law nature of the grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of most of the grave breaches of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, considered that ordering the displacement of the civilian population for reasons related to the conflict, unless the security of the civilians involved or military reasons so demanded, was a serious violation of international law applicable in non-international armed conflicts and a war crime. 
ICRC, Working paper submitted to the Preparatory Committee for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, 14 February 1997, § 1(a)(vi) and 3(xiii).
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards
The Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights of Åbo Akademi University in Turku/Åbo, Finland in 1990, states that “the displacement of the population or parts thereof shall not be ordered unless their safety or imperative security reasons so demand”. 
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights, Åbo Akademi University, Turku/Åbo, 30 November–2 December 1990, Article 7(1), IRRC, No. 282, p. 333.