Related Rule
Peru
Practice Relating to Rule 65. Perfidy
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “a distinction must be made between ruses of war (permitted) and perfidy (prohibited)”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(1).
The manual further states: “Perfidy is a hostile act carried out under the cover of legal protection.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).
The manual defines the term “perfidy” as: “Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead it to believe that it is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 135.c.
The manual defines the term “treachery” as: “The term used in the law of armed conflict to forbid killing or wounding individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army by betraying the confidence of an adversary.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 135.c.
In the context of air warfare, the manual states:
Perfidy is always illegal.
Perfidy is prohibited without any kind of qualification identifying it with any particular type of warfare. In other words, it is prohibited to engage in hostile acts, regardless of the military advantage they may secure, that are designed to betray the enemy’s good will. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, Annex 9, Glossary of Terms.
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “a distinction must be made between ruses of war (permitted) and perfidy (prohibited).” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(1), p. 238.
The manual further states: “Perfidy is a hostile act carried out under the cover of legal protection.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2), p. 239.
In its Glossary of Terms, the manual defines “perfidy” as: “Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead it to believe that it is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, p. 411; see also § 126(c), p. 319.
In its Glossary of Terms, the manual defines “treachery” as: “The term used in the law of armed conflict to forbid killing or wounding individuals belonging to the hostile nation or army by betraying the confidence of an adversary.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, p. 416.
In the context of air warfare, the manual states:
Perfidy is always illegal.
Perfidy is prohibited without any kind of qualification identifying it with any particular type of warfare. In other words, it is prohibited to engage in hostile acts, regardless of the military advantage they may secure, that are designed to betray the enemy’s good will. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 156(b), p. 339.
At the CDDH, Peru deplored the elimination of numerous articles and paragraphs in the final version of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, especially the one relating to the prohibition of perfidy. 
Peru, Statement at the CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VII, CDDH/SR.56, 8 June 1977, p. 226, § 161.
Peru’s Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited methods in the conduct of hostilities”, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than six years and not more than twenty-five years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she:
7. Treacherously attacks a member of the enemy armed forces or a member of the adverse party who directly participates in hostilities, with the result set out in Article 33, paragraphs 16 and 17 [of the present code, namely serious injury or death]. 
Peru, Military and Police Criminal Code, 2010, Article 91(7).
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “the feigning of an incapacitation by wounds or sickness” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).(c).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “the feigning of an incapacitation by wounds or sickness” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2)(c), p. 239.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “the feigning of an intent to surrender” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).(b).
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … surrender or distress by, e.g., sending a distress signal or by the crew taking to life rafts.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 135.c.(2).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “the feigning of an intent to surrender” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2)(b), p. 239.
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Examples of perfidious acts include … the launching of an attack while feigning: … surrender or distress by, e.g., sending a distress signal or by the crew taking to life rafts.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 126(c)(2), p. 319.
Peru’s Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited methods in the conduct of hostilities, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than ten and not more than twenty years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she improperly uses … the white flag … with the result set out in Article 33, paragraphs 16 and 17 [of the present code, namely causing serious injury or death]. 
Peru, Military and Police Criminal Code, 2010, Article 96.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “the feigning of an intent to negotiate under a flag of truce” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).(a).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “the feigning of an intent to negotiate under a flag of truce” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2)(a), p. 239.
Peru’s Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited methods in the conduct of hostilities, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than ten and not more than twenty years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she improperly uses … the white flag … with the result set out in Article 33, paragraphs 16 and 17 [of the present code, namely causing serious injury or death]. 
Peru, Military and Police Criminal Code, 2010, Article 96.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that the “perfidious use of the distinctive sign of the red cross [or] red crescent” is a war crime. 
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.(8); see also § 172.h.
The manual further states:
Medical personnel must refrain from any act that can be classed as a war crime against persons or property protected under international humanitarian law. These include:
(5) deliberate misuse of the distinctive sign of the red cross … (act of perfidy), causing death or seriously endangering physical health or integrity. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 83.f.(5).
The manual also prohibits the following acts as being perfidious:
Carrying out hostile operations of any kind, even aerial reconnaissance, under cover of aircraft registration numbers or markings belonging to … humanitarian agencies, non-governmental organizations and international agencies engaged in eminently humanitarian or neutral functions. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 165.b.(2).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that the “perfidious use of the distinctive sign of the red cross, red crescent or other protective signs” is a war crime. 
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(c)(1)(a)(8), p. 248.
The manual further states:
Medical personnel must refrain from any act that can be classed as a war crime against persons or objects protected under international humanitarian law. These include:
(5) Deliberate misuse of the distinctive sign of the red cross, red crescent or other recognized protected signs, causing death or seriously endangering physical health or integrity. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 74(f)(5), p. 273.
Peru’s Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited methods in the conduct of hostilities, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than ten and not more than twenty years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she improperly uses the protective signs of the [1949] Geneva Conventions … with the result set out in Article 33, paragraphs 16 and 17 [of the present code, namely causing serious injury or death]. 
Peru, Military and Police Criminal Code, 2010, Article 96.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).(e).
The manual further states that the “perfidious use of … recognized protective emblems” is a war crime. 
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.(8).
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … protected United Nations status.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 135.c.(1).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “the feigning of status of a protected person by using signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2)(e), p. 239.
The manual further states that the “perfidious use of … recognized protective emblems” is a war crime. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 74(f)(5), p. 273.
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … protected United Nations status.”  
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 126(c)(2), p. 319.
Peru’s Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited methods in the conduct of hostilities, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than ten and not more than twenty years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she improperly uses … the flag … of the United Nations with the result set out in Article 33, paragraphs 16 and 17 [of the present code, namely causing serious injury or death]. 
Peru, Military and Police Criminal Code, 2010, Article 96.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that the “perfidious use of … other recognized protective emblems” is a war crime. 
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.(8); see also § 172.h.
The manual further states:
Medical personnel must refrain from any act that can be classed as a war crime against persons or property protected under international humanitarian law. These include:
(5) deliberate misuse of … other recognized protective emblems (act of perfidy), causing death or seriously endangering physical health or integrity. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 83.f.(5).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that the “perfidious use of … recognized protective emblems” is a war crime. 
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(c)(1)(a)(8), p. 248.
The manual further states:
Medical personnel must refrain from any act that can be classed as a war crime against persons or objects protected under international humanitarian law. These include:
(5) Deliberate misuse of … other recognized protected signs, causing death or seriously endangering physical health or integrity. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 74(f)(5), p. 273.
The manual also prohibits the following acts as being perfidious:
Carrying out hostile operations of any kind, even aerial reconnaissance, under cover of aircraft registration numbers or markings belonging to … humanitarian agencies, non-governmental organizations and international agencies engaged in eminently humanitarian or neutral functions. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 156, p. 339.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “the feigning of civilian, non-combatant status” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).(d).
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … civilian … status.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 135.c.(1).
In the context of air warfare, the manual also prohibits the following act as being perfidious: “Using a commercial flight or an overflight agreement to carry out a hostile operation, such as photographic or electronic reconnaissance, the activation of air defence systems or even a direct attack”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 165.b.(1).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “the feigning of civilian or non-combatant status” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2)(d), p. 239.
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … civilian … status.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 126(c)(1), p. 319.
In the context of air warfare, the manual also prohibits the following act as being perfidious: “Using a commercial flight or an overflight agreement to carry out a hostile operation, such as photographic or electronic reconnaissance, the activation of air defence systems or even a direct attack”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 156(b)(1), p. 339.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of … neutral States” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 27.e.(9).(e).
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … neutral … status.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 135.c.(1).
The manual also prohibits the following acts as being perfidious: “Carrying out hostile operations of any kind, even aerial reconnaissance, under cover of aircraft registration numbers or markings belonging to neutral countries”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 165.b.(2).
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of … neutral States” is an example of perfidy. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 28(e)(2)(e), p. 239.
In the context of armed conflict at sea, the manual states: “Perfidious acts include the launching of an attack while feigning: … neutral … status.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 126(c)(1), p. 319.
The manual also prohibits the following acts as being perfidious: “Carrying out hostile operations of any kind, even aerial reconnaissance, under cover of aircraft registration numbers or markings belonging to neutral countries”. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 156(b)(2), p. 339.