Practice Relating to Rule 115. Disposal of the Dead
Quick navigation
Geneva Convention (1929)
Article 4, fifth paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva Convention provides that belligerents shall ensure that “the dead are honourably interred”. 
Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field, Geneva, 27 July 1929, Article 4, fifth para.

Geneva POW Convention
Article 76, third paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva POW Convention provides: “The belligerents shall ensure that prisoners of war who have died in captivity are honourably buried.” 
Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 27 July 1929, Article 76, third para.

Geneva Convention I
Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides:
[Parties to the conflict] shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are respected, grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased, properly maintained and marked so that they may always be found. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17, third para.

Geneva Convention III
Article 120 of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides
The detaining authorities shall ensure that prisoners of war who have died in captivity are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, and that their graves are respected, suitably maintained and marked so as to be found at any time. 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 120, fourth para.

Geneva Convention IV
Article 130 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides:
The detaining authorities shall ensure that internees who die while interned are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, and that their graves are respected, properly maintained, and marked in such a way that they can always be recognized. 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 130, first para.

Additional Protocol II
Article 8 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides: “Whenever circumstances permit, and particularly after an engagement, all possible measures shall be taken, without delay, to … decently dispose of [the dead].” 
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 8. Article 8 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VII, CDDH/SR.51, 3 June 1977, p. 110.

Back to top
Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “breach of the duty … to give [those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention] decent burial” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay … to dispose of [the dead] with respect.” 
Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines, The Hague, 16 March 1998, Part IV, Articles 3(4) and 4(9).

Back to top
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides that the remains of deceased persons shall be honourably buried. 
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, § 3.005; see also 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, § 2.06.

Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides: “The minimum respect for the remains of the dead is a decent burial or cremation.” 
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 998.

Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
9.103 …. The minimum respect for the remains of the dead is a decent burial or cremation …
9.104 … In the case of burial the deceased shall be honourably interred. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, §§ 9.103–9.104.

Belgium
Belgium’s Law of War Manual (1983) provides: “The necessary measures shall be taken to bury the dead.” 
Belgium, Droit Pénal et Disciplinaire Militaire et Droit de la Guerre, Deuxième Partie, Droit de la Guerre, Ecole Royale Militaire, par J. Maes, Chargé de cours, Avocat-général près la Cour Militaire, D/1983/1187/029, 1983, p. 49.

Brazil
Brazil’s Operations Manual for the Evacuation of Non-Combatants (2007) states: “Burial. The Joint Command shall ensure that appropriate treatment is given to the mortal remains of military personnel and non-combatants.” 
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, § 6.4.3.

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 …

3.4.1 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.

Annex A. Rules of Engagement and the Law of Armed Conflict

3. The Law of Armed Conflict
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, §§ 1.2.1 and 3.4.1, and Annex A, § 3.

Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states that “after identification, the dead must be buried individually, if the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit”. 
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. 25.

Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (2006), under the heading “The Dead”, also states: “If the tactical situation permits, and after identification, the dead must be buried, incinerated or buried at sea, as appropriate.” 
Cameroon, Droit des conflits armés et droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces de défense, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 122, § 403; see also p. 60, § 251, p. 85, § 341, p. 117, § 391, p. 159, § 452 and p. 164, § 463.

Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides: “Parties to the conflict shall ensure that the dead are honourably interred.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 9-6, § 58.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides: “The dead shall be honourably interred.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 7, § 5.

Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked:
1. The remains of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities or while in occupation or detention in relation thereto shall be respected, and their gravesites properly respected, maintained and marked.

5. Parties to the conflict shall ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belong. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 925.1 and 5.

After any engagement and whenever circumstances permit, all possible steps must be taken without delay to search for and collect the wounded, sick and shipwrecked … Steps must also be taken to search for the dead … and provide for their decent disposition. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1718.

Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states:
As a general principle, subject to any religious or ethnic variations, the funeral arrangements for a PW [prisoners of war] are to be the same as those, which would be made for a member of the Canadian Forces dying in the AOO [Area of Operations]. 
Canada, Prisoner of War Handling, Detainees, Interrogation and Tactical Questioning in International Operations, B-GJ-005-110/FP-020, National Defence Headquarters, 1 August 2004, § 3F17.5.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) states: “The dead shall be honourably interred.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 2005, Rule 7, § 5.

Central African Republic
The Central African Republic’s Instructor’s Manual (1999) states in Volume 2 (Instruction for group and patrol leaders):
The dead … must then be buried, cremated or buried at sea when the tactical situation permits and other circumstances (hygiene) permit. … Dead bodies which, owing to the circumstances, are not buried, cremated or buried at sea, must be evacuated. 
Central African Republic, Le Droit de la Guerre, Fascicule No. 2: Formation pour l’obtention du certificat technique No. 2 (Chef de Groupe), du certificat Inter-Armé (CIA), du certificat d’aptitude de Chef de Patrouille (CACP), Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Centrafricaines, 1999, Chapter III, Section II, § 2.3; see also Chapter II, Section III, § 3.1.

Croatia
Croatia’s Commanders’ Manual (1992) provides: “As a rule, the dead shall be identified and buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.” 
Croatia, Basic Rules of the Law of Armed Conflicts – Commanders’ Manual, Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, 1992, § 76; see also § 89 and Compendium “Law of Armed Conflicts”, Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, 1991, p. 47.

France
France’s LOAC Summary Note (1992) provides that the dead must be “identified, evacuated and buried, cremated or buried at sea”. 
France, Fiche de Synthèse sur les Règles Applicables dans les Conflits Armés, Note No. 432/DEF/EMA/OL.2/NP, Général de Corps d’Armée Voinot (pour l’Amiral Lanxade, Chef d’Etat-major des Armées), 1992, § 2.1.

France’s LOAC Teaching Note (2000) states:
After combat, the dead of both sides must be identified, evacuated and buried, cremated or buried at sea. To the extent possible, the dead must in principle be buried in order to allow for the repatriation of their remains later on. 
France, Fiche didactique relative au droit des conflits armés, Directive of the Ministry of Defence, 4 January 2000, annexed to the Directive No. 147 of the Ministry of Defence of 4 January 2000, p. 3.

France’s LOAC Manual (2001) reproduces Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I. 
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. 121.

Hungary
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) states: “The dead may be buried, buried at sea, cremated”. 
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 77.

Israel
According to Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998), a “[legal] combatant is entitled to the status of a prisoner of war, according him … the right to a proper burial”. 
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, p. 46.

Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states: “The bodies of the fallen must not be desecrated and they must be given suitable burial.” 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 30.

Following barbaric acts committed by soldiers, such as scalping, cutting off the ears and “collecting” fingers, the Geneva Convention was required to provide for the orderly and honourable burial of the enemy’s fallen. The pressure for this actually came from the combatants who wanted to give the last honours to their enemies and ensure that the same treatment would be accorded to their own fallen. 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 39.

The IDF [Israel Defense Forces] maintains a cemetery where the bodies are laid to rest of terrorists killed in skirmishes with the IDF. In exchange for the return of the bodies of IDF soldiers who fell, the bodies of Hezbollah fighters were returned to it. 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 39.

Italy
Italy’s LOAC Elementary Rules Manual (1991) provides: “As a general rule, the dead shall be … buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.” 
Italy, Regole elementari di diritto di guerra, SMD-G-012, Stato Maggiore della Difesa, I Reparto, Ufficio Addestramento e Regolamenti, Rome, 1991, § 76.

Kenya
Kenya’s LOAC Manual (1997) states: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually, when the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit.” 
Kenya, Law of Armed Conflict, Military Basic Course (ORS), 4 Précis, The School of Military Police, 1997, Précis No. 3, p. 11.

Madagascar
Madagascar’s Military Manual (1994) provides: “Generally, the dead shall be … buried, incinerated or buried at sea individually.” 
Madagascar, Le Droit des Conflits Armés, Ministère des Forces Armées, August 1994, Fiche No. 7-O, § 23; see also Fiche No. 8-O, § 25 and Fiche No. 6-SO, § B.

Mexico
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009) states: “The [1949 Geneva] Convention [III] specifies burial (and, in certain cases cremation) requirements to ensure respect for the dead and to safeguard the interests of their families.” 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 197.

Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “Burial must be performed with dignity.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0610.

New Zealand
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) provides: “The remains [of the dead] … shall be respected”. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 1012(1).

Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
Burial on land or at sea and cremation of the dead should be preceded by a careful examination, if possible a medical examination, of the bodies, with a view to confirming death, establishing identity and enabling a report to be made … The dead must be honourably interred … At sea, the dead should be committed to the sea, individually if circumstances permit, if they cannot be taken to land. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 86.b.

Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states:
Burial on land or at sea and cremation of the dead should be preceded by a careful examination, if possible a medical examination, of the bodies, with a view to confirming death, establishing identity and enabling a report to be made. … The dead must be honourably interred. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 77(b), p. 277; see also p. 427.

Philippines
The Military Instructions (1989) of the Philippines provides: “Evacuation of all dead bodies must be done … and arrangements for a decent burial made.” 
Philippines, Safety of Innocent Civilians and Treatment of the Wounded and Dead, 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 Defence, 6 September 1989, p. 27, § 4; see also Military Directive to Commanders (1988), p. 30, Guideline 4(h)(6).

The Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (2006) provides:
After an engagement:

6. Bring the bodies to the police, if possible and demand receipt. If possible, bring the dead to proper authorities. If not, bury them and mark their graves so they can be retrieved later. This will dispel any doubts of foul play.
7. Inform immediately the bereaved families of the dead. Inform immediately the families of the dead. This includes the dead enemies and crossfire victims. Crossfire victims are entitled of burial assistance from the government. Provide whatever assistance to the families of the dead, to include financial help, if possible. 
Philippines, Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, A Practical Guide for Internal Security Operations, 2006, p. 61, §§ 6–7.

Peru
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states: “Bodies should only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene or for reasons connected to the religion of the deceased.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 77(b), p. 277.

Poland
Poland’s Procedures Governing the Interment of Soldiers Killed in Action (2009) defines “Emergency burial” as “[a] burial, usually on the battlefield, when conditions do not permit evacuation for burial in a cemetery”. 
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 2.1.

The bodies of persons who have died on the open seas should be disposed of by lowering the body into the sea, in line with naval custom.
If the ship is able to reach port within 24 hours, the remains shall be transported onto land and buried there. In that case, the burial shall be conducted in accordance with procedures pertaining to burial on land.  
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 2.4.4.

Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Military Manual (1990) states that the emergency disposal of the dead is one of the activities of civil defence that helps eliminate the immediate effects of hostilities or disaster. 
Russian Federation, Instructions on the Application of the Rules of International Humanitarian Law by the Armed Forces of the USSR, Appendix to Order of the USSR Defence Minister No. 75, 1990, § 9(l).

The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) provides:
Search for, collection, identification and burial of the dead members of the enemy armed forces as well as of other victims of armed conflicts shall be organized immediately, as soon as the situation permits, and carried out to … bury them with due dignity and respect as required by ethical principles. 
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, § 164.

Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) states: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea as soon as the tactical situation and other circumstances permit.” 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states that “the dead must be buried or cremated … when the tactical situation or other circumstances permit”. 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) provides: “Burial shall be honourable.” 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 76(2).

Togo
Togo’s Military Manual (1996) provides that the dead “shall be buried, incinerated or disposed of at sea individually when the tactical situation or other circumstances (hygiene) so permit”. 
Togo, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Etat-major Général des Forces Armées Togolaises, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1996, Fascicule II, p. 12; see also p. 9 and Fascicule III, p. 5.

Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
1.4.12. … As soon as the circumstances allow, all parties to an armed conflict shall … organize the search for the dead to … ensure their proper burial.

2.5.3.1. … Measures to search for, collect, identify and bury the dead shall be organized as soon as the situation permits. Those measures shall be aimed at the … dignified burial [of the dead] according to general human principles. 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, §§ 1.4.12 and 2.5.3.1.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides that “the belligerents must make provision for honourable interment” of the dead. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 383.

The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states:
7.35 The remains of the dead are to be honourably interred (unless burial at sea is appropriate) …
Graves
7.36. Graves must be respected and properly maintained. …
Exhumation
7.37. Exhumation is permitted only (a) in accordance with an agreement on the matters dealt with in paragraph 7.36; or (b) in accordance with overriding public necessity (which may include “medical or investigative necessity”). In such circumstances, the authorities of the territory in which the grave sites are situated are required to respect the remains and to give notice to the home state of the intended exhumation together with details of the intended place of re-interment. However, these provisions do not prevent the exhumation of temporary graves for the purpose of moving the remains to permanent graves in dignified, properly maintained cemeteries, such as those of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, §§ 7.35–7.37.

Whenever circumstances permit, and particularly after an engagement, all possible measures shall be taken without delay … to search for the dead, prevent their being despoiled and decently dispose of them. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 15.44.

United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) states that parties to the conflict “shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred”. 
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, § 218.

The US Operational Law Handbook (1993) provides: “The Parties must ensure proper burial.” 
United States, Operational Law Handbook, JA 422, Center for Law and Military Operations and International Law Division, The Judge Advocate General’s School, United States Army, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-1781, 1993, p. Q-185.

The US Manual on Detainee Operations (2008) states:
Legal Considerations
a. As a subset of military operations, detainee operations must comply with the law of war during all armed conflicts, however such conflicts are characterized, and in all other military operations …

c. The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 are fully applicable as a matter of international law to all military operations that qualify as international armed conflicts … The principles reflected in these treaties are considered customary international law, binding on all nations during international armed conflict. Although often referred to collectively as the “Geneva Conventions,” the specific treaties are:

(2) [1949] Geneva Convention [II] … This convention … provides for burial at sea. 
United States, Manual on Detainee Operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 30 May 2008, pp. I-2–I-3.

Back to top
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan’s Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War (1995) provides:
The appropriate authorities and governmental bodies of the Azerbaijan Republic shall ensure that the necessary measures be taken that: … the dead bodies of persons who are not citizens of the State concerned and died of wounds or in prison, and whose death is connected with the military operations or occupation, should be buried with the necessary respect. 
Azerbaijan, Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War, 1995, Article 29(3).

Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).

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).

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).

Ireland
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, provides that any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 20 of the Geneva Convention II, Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 130 of the Geneva Convention IV, as well as any “contravention” of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, including violations of Article 8, are punishable offences. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).

Italy
Italy’s Law of War Decree (1938), as amended in 1992, provides that commanders shall take all the necessary measures “to give [the dead] an honourable burial”. 
Italy, Law of War Decree, 1938, as amended in 1992, Article 94.

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 Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … [and in] the two additional protocols to these Conventions … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108.

Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka’s Emergency Regulations (2005), as amended to 2008, states:
54. Where a police officer or member of the armed forces has reason to believe that the death of any person may have been caused as a result of any action taken in the course of duty either by him or by any subordinate officer as the case may be, or where any person dies in police custody or military custody, the Superintendent of Police in charge of the division to which such police officer is attached or in the case of a member of the armed forces the Commanding Officer of the Unit to which he belongs … shall … [n]otwithstanding anything to the contrary to Chapter XXX [relating to inquests of deaths], and Section 9, of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No. 15 of 1979 [giving power to the Magistrates’ court to inquire into sudden deaths] or the provisions of any other written law for the time being in force … report the facts relating to such death to the Inspector-General of Police or the nearest Deputy Inspector-General of Police.

56. …
(2) The Deputy Inspector-General of Police to whom the body is handed over … may in the interest of national security or for the maintenance or preservation of public order, authorize the taking possession of and effecting the burial or cremation of the dead body in accordance with such steps as he may deem necessary in the circumstances.

58A. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this regulation, where death is caused to a police officer or a member of the armed forces, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to the Ministry of the Minister in charge of the subject of Defence, –
(a) to instruct the Inspector-General of Police or the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army, the Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy or the Commander of the Sri Lanka Air Force as the case may be, to take all such measures as may be necessary for the cremation or burial of the dead body, subject to such restrictions and conditions as he may impose in the interest of national security, or for the maintenance or preservation of public order; or
(b) to direct the Inspector-General of Police to take such steps as are set out in regulation 54 in respect of such death and accordingly the provisions of regulations 55, 56, 57 and 58 shall thereupon be applicable. 
Sri Lanka, Emergency Regulations, 2005, as amended to 5 August 2008, Sections 54, 56(2) and 58A.

Venezuela
Venezuela’s Code of Military Justice (1998), as amended, punishes “those who do not take care of the burial, cremation or burial at sea of the dead”. 
Venezuela, Code of Military Justice, 1998, as amended, Article 474(12).

Back to top
Israel
In its ruling in the Barake case in 2002, dealing with the question of when, how and by whom the mortal remains of Palestinians who died in a battle in Jenin refugee camp should be identified and buried, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated: “Needless to say, the burial will be made in an appropriate and respectful manner, maintaining the respect for the dead … [T]he burial will be conducted in a respectful manner, conforming to religious laws, and as soon as possible.” 
Israel, High Court of Justice, Barake case, Ruling, 14 April 2002, §§ 8 and 9.

In its judgment in Physicians for Human Rights v Commander of IDF Forces in the Gaza Strip in 2004, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated:
Our assumption is that the fundamental principle that the dignity of local residents must be protected, as enshrined in section 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, encompasses not only local residents who are living, but also the dead. Compare Fourth Geneva Convention, §130; see Pictet, at 506; see also HCJ 3436/02 The International Custodian of Terra Santa v. The Government of Israel, at 22, 25. Human dignity includes the dignity of the living and the dignity of the dead. The same applies with regard to domestic Israeli law. See CA 294/91 Jerusalem Community Jewish Burial Society v. Kestenbaum, at 464; FH HCJ 3299/93 Wikselbaum v. The Minister of Defense, at 195; CA 6024/97 Shavit v. Rishon Lezion Jewish Burial Society, at 600. “The protection of the dead and their dignity is just like the protection of the living and their dignity.” See Justice J. Türkel in HCJ 81/66 The Inspector-General of The Israel Police v. Ramla Magistrate Court Judge Mr. Baizer, at 337, 353. The military commander is duty-bound to search for and locate dead bodies. See HCJ 3117/02 The Center for the Defense of the Individual – Founded by Dr. Lota Salzberger v. The Minister of Defense, at 17, 18. After bodies are found, he is obligated to ensure that they are accorded a dignified burial. In the Barake case, which discussed the duty of the military commander regarding dead bodies during army operations, we stated:
Our starting point is that, under the circumstances, respondents are responsible for the location, identification, evacuation and burial of the bodies. This is their obligation under international law. Respondents accept this position … The location, identification, and burial of bodies are important humanitarian acts. They are a direct consequence of the principle of respect for the dead – respect for all dead. They are fundamental to our existence as a Jewish and democratic state. Respondents declared that they are acting according to this approach, and this attitude seems appropriate to us … Indeed, it is usually possible to agree on humanitarian issues. Respect for the dead is important to us all, as man was created in the image of God. All parties hope to finish the location, identification, and burial process as soon as possible. Respondents are willing to include representatives of the Red Cross and, during the identification stage after the location and evacuation stages, local authorities as well (subject to specific decision of the military commander). All agree that burials should be performed with respect, according to religious custom, in a timely manner. Id, at 15.
The army attempted to act according to these principles in the case at hand. The dead were identified and transferred to A-Najar Hospital. At both these stages the Red Cross and the Red Crescent were involved. The problem here, however, concerned burial. Respondent was obviously prepared to bury the dead, but it believed that it had discharged this duty by transferring the bodies to A-Najar Hospital. This was not the case. The duty of the respondent is to ensure a dignified burial for the bodies. To this end, he must negotiate with the local authorities, to the extent that they are functioning, and find respectful ways to carry out this duty. As is clear from the information presented to us, the main difficulty which arose was the participation of the relatives of the dead. This matter was in the power of the respondent, whose forces controlled all entrances and exits to Tel A-Sultan, and respondent was obviously limited by security considerations. Apparently, the later proposals should have been proposed earlier. The changing position of respondent indicates that it did not prepare for the situation in advance, and it improvised the proposed solutions on the spot. This should not have happened. Preparations for dealing with the dead should have been planned in advance. Clear procedures should be fixed regarding the different stages of the process. Of course, if, at the end of the day, the dead are in a hospital and their relatives refuse to bury them, they should not be forced to do so. Nevertheless, everything should be done in order to reach an agreement on this matter. 
Israel, High Court of Justice, Physicians for Human Rights v. Commander of IDF Forces in the Gaza Strip, Judgment, 30 May 2004, § 27.

Back to top
Algeria
The Report on the Practice of Algeria notes that during the Algerian war of independence, “Algerian soldiers on occasion buried enemy personnel who died in combat”. 
Report on the Practice of Algeria, 1997, Chapter 5.1, referring to El Moudjahid, Vol. 2, p. 641.

Islamic Republic of Iran
According to the Report on the Practice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is the opinio juris of the Islamic Republic of Iran, based on practice during the Iran–Iraq War, that, where dead combatants cannot be returned to the relevant party, they should be buried. 
Report on the Practice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, 1997, Chapter 5.1, referring to Statement by the Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs, 15 November 1980 and Military Communiqué No. 2176, 27 July 1985.

Israel
According to the Report on the Practice of Israel, the Israel Defense Forces are sensitive to the correct and proper treatment of remains and have established detailed internal regulations and procedures concerning their burial. 
Report on the Practice of Israel, 1997, Chapter 5.1.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 2003, in a written reply to a question in the House of Lords, the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence, stated:
The Deployed Operating Instructions issued to all United Kingdom military units state that enemy dead are to be treated the same as UK military dead. This includes a direction that, where next of kin cannot be traced, the bodies are to be given the same funeral as would UK military personnel, subject to religious practices. 
United Kingdom, House of Lords, Written answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Hansard, 8 September 2003, Vol. 652, Written Answers, col. WA40.

Zimbabwe
In 2013, in a reply to a member of parliament, Zimbabwe’s deputy minister of home affairs stated:
[R]egarding the reburial of people who died during the war of liberation … [t]hese people’s remains were exhumed and reburied in a decent way. … [I]f [anybody] know[s] of any place where there are some people who died during the war, please come and report to [the] Ministry [of Home Affairs, which] will exhume the remains and rebury them decently. 
Zimbabwe, Parliament of Zimbabwe, Oral answers by the Government to questions without notice by Members of Parliament, 10 October 2013.

Back to top
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 2005 on human rights and forensic science, the UN Commission on Human Rights underlined “the importance of dignified handling of human remains, including their proper management and disposal, as well as of respect for the needs of families”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 2005/26, 19 April 2005, preamble, adopted without a vote.

UN Commission on Human Rights (Special Rapporteur)
In 1996, the Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions identified as a particular concern a report that the bodies of six civilians who had been beaten and summarily executed by the Papua New Guinea Defence Forces were dumped at sea from helicopters. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, Report, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1996/4/Add.2, 27 February 1996, § 73.

UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) noted that “interment should be carried out in an honourable fashion”. 
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780, 1992, Final report, Annex Summaries and Conclusions, UN Doc. S/1994/674/Add.2 (Vol. I), 31 May 1995, § 503(b).

Back to top
European Union
In February 1995, in a statement before the Permanent Council of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) on the situation in Chechnya, the EU stated that the proposal to establish a “humanitarian truce” appeared essential in order to provide the victims with a decent burial. 
EU, Statement by France on behalf of the EU before the Permanent Council of the OSCE, Vienna, 2 February 1995, Politique étrangère de la France, February 1995, p. 155.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually, when the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit.” 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 512.

Back to top
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: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … to dispose of [the dead] with respect.” 
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 13, IRRC, No. 282, p. 335.

Note: For practice concerning respect for convictions and religious practices in general, see Rule 104.
Quick navigation
Geneva Convention I
Article 17, third paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides that the Parties to the conflict must “ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged”. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17, third para.

Geneva Convention III
Article 120, fourth paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides that the Parties to the conflict must “ensure that prisoners of war who have died in captivity are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged”. 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 120, fourth para.

Geneva Convention IV
Article 130, first paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides that the Parties to the conflict must “ensure that internees who die while interned are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged”. 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 130, first para.

NATO Standardization Agreement 2070
The 1999 NATO Standardization Agreement 2070 provides:
10. Whenever practicable, a brief burial service of the appropriate religion is to be held …
11. An appropriate (religious) marker high enough to be seen readily is to be erected. 
Standardization Agreement 2070, Edition 4, Emergency War Burial Procedures, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Military Agency for Standardization, Brussels, 6 April 1999, §§ 10 and 11.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides that the dead “shall be buried … if possible according to their religious rites”. 
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, § 3.005.

Australia
According to Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides:
998. The remains of the dead, regardless of whether they are combatants, non-combatants, protected persons or civilians are to be respected, in particular their honour, family rights, religious convictions and practices and manners and customs. … The minimum respect for the remains of the dead is a decent burial or cremation in accordance with their religious practices.
999. The burial or cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually in accordance with the religious rights and practices of the deceased. 
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, §§ 998–999.

Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
9.103 The remains of the dead, regardless of whether they are combatants, non-combatants, protected persons or civilians are to be respected, in particular their honour, family rights, religious convictions and practices and manners and customs. … The minimum respect for the remains of the dead is a decent burial or cremation in accordance with their religious practices.
9.104 The burial or cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually in accordance with the religious rites and practices of the deceased. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, §§ 9.103–9.104.

Benin
Benin’s Military Manual (1995) provides: “The dead shall be … buried … according to their religious rites.” 
Benin, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Forces Armées du Bénin, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1995, Fascicule III, p. 5; see also Fascicule II, p. 12.

Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states: “Regarding deceased prisoners of war, they must be buried or incinerated individually if circumstances permit and according to the rites of the religion to which the deceased belonged.” 
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. 105.

Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (1992) states that the burial shall take place according to the religion of the deceased. 
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. 118, § 431(2).

Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (2006), under the heading “The Case of Deceased Prisoners of War”, states: “The [disposal of the dead] must be held according to [appropriate] religious rituals.” 
Cameroon, Droit des conflits armés et droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces de défense, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 265, § 621.

Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides: “Parties to the conflict shall ensure that the dead are … interred and if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belong.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 9-6, § 58.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides: “The dead shall be … interred, and if possible accorded the rites of the religion to which the deceased belonged.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 7, § 5.

Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked:
5. Parties to the conflict shall ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belong.
6. Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for religious motives. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 925.5–6.

Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states, with regard to the funeral arrangements for prisoners of war (PW):
b. Cremation. PW may only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene, on account of the religion of the PW or in accordance with a written request by the PW or by the Prisoners’ Representative on the PW’s behalf …
c. Burial. [The 1949 Geneva Convention III] places a duty on the detaining authorities to ensure that:
(1) PW who have died in captivity are [to be] honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged. 
Canada, Prisoner of War Handling, Detainees, Interrogation and Tactical Questioning in International Operations, B-GJ-005-110/FP-020, National Defence Headquarters, 1 August 2004, § 3F17.5.b–c.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) instructs: “The dead shall be honourably interred, and if possible accorded the rites of the religion to which the deceased belonged.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 2005, Rule 7, § 5.

Central African Republic
The Central African Republic’s Instructor’s Manual (1999) states in Volume 2 (Instruction for group and patrol leaders): “Cremations may be performed only … in accordance with the religion of the deceased.” 
Central African Republic, Le Droit de la Guerre, Fascicule No. 2: Formation pour l’obtention du certificat technique No. 2 (Chef de Groupe), du certificat Inter-Armé (CIA), du certificat d’aptitude de Chef de Patrouille (CACP), Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Centrafricaines, 1999, Chapter III, Section II, § 2.3.

Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) states: “Generally speaking, the enemy fallen are to be interred (in accordance with their religion’s customs insofar as possible).” 
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, p. 61.

Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states: “As a rule, the enemy’s fallen should be buried as per their religious rites as far as possible.” 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 39.

Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “Cremation of a corpse is permitted for pressing hygienic or religious reasons.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0609.

Philippines
The Military Instructions (1989) of the Philippines stipulates: “Religious services must be provided if required.” 
Philippines, Safety of Innocent Civilians and Treatment of the Wounded and Dead, 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 Defence, 6 September 1989, p. 27, § 4.

The Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (2006) provides:
After an engagement:

4. Identify the dead. Pursue the identification of the dead. Enemy forces often bring with them documents that carry their identities. After identification, inform the nearest of kin and respect their cultural traditions. 
Philippines, Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, A Practical Guide for Internal Security Operations, 2006, p. 61, § 4.

Poland
Poland’s Procedures Governing the Interment of Soldiers Killed in Action (2009) states:
Irrespective of the circumstances of death, the aim shall always be to ensure that the dead are buried according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged … The burial rites should be performed by an army chaplain, or a cleric belonging to the same faith as the deceased. 
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 2.1.

Civilian members of the armed forces who had not participated in hostilities shall be buried in line with procedures established for the burial of the bodies of soldiers. Deceased residents of a conflict zone may, if circumstances permit, be buried in accordance with their religious beliefs. 
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 2.4.2.

Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) provides:
Whenever possible, dead bodies or the remains thereof shall be buried individually in accordance with the rites of the religion to which they belonged.
Dead bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. 
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, § 168.

Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states: “The religious beliefs of the deceased, if known, should be respected.” 
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, § 6.2.b.(3).

Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) provides: “Inhumation shall … [take place] if possible according to the religious rites of the deceased.” 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 76(2).

Togo
Togo’s Military Manual (1996) provides: “The dead shall be … buried … according to their religious rites.” 
Togo, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Etat-major Général des Forces Armées Togolaises, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1996, Fascicule III, p. 5; see also Fascicule II, p. 12.

Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “As much as possible, the burial of the dead bodies or their remains shall be done individually and according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged.” 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, § 2.5.3.6.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides: “The belligerents must make provision for … interment … if possible according to the rites of the religion to which the dead belong.” 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 383.

The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states:
The remains of the dead are to be honourably interred (unless burial at sea is appropriate), in so far as possible in individual graves, and, if possible, according to the rites of the religion to which the deceased belonged. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 7.35.

United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) states that parties to the conflict “shall further ensure that the dead are … interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged”. 
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, § 218; see also Operational Law Handbook (1993), p. Q-185.

Back to top
Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).

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).

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).

Ireland
Under Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 130 of the Geneva Convention IV, is a punishable offence. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).

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 Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108(a).

Back to top
Israel
In its ruling in the Barake case in 2002, dealing with the question of when, how and by whom the mortal remains of Palestinians who died in a battle in Jenin refugee camp should be identified and buried, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated: “The burial will be conducted … conforming to religious laws.” 
Israel, High Court of Justice, Barake case, Ruling, 14 April 2002, § 8.

Russian Federation
In 2007, in the Burial case, the Russian Federation’s Constitutional Court was called upon to rule on the constitutionality of two laws related to the interment of suspected terrorists whose deaths resulted from the interception of their terrorist acts. The Court held that the restrictive measures introduced by these laws were in conformity with the Constitution. The Court stated:
2. … The right of a person to be buried after death, in accordance with his will, observing the customs and traditions, religious and ritual cults ensues from the Constitution of the Russian Federation, in particular from Articles 21, 22, 28 and 29, which guarantee the protection of human dignity, the right to freedom and personal inviolability, freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought and speech, opinion and beliefs, as well as from universally acknowledged principles and norms of international law, which, by virtue of Article 15 (4) of the Constitution prevail over national legislation. …

3.1 … [T]he interest in fighting terrorism, in preventing terrorism in general and specific terms and in providing redress for the effects of terrorist acts, coupled with the risk of mass disorder, clashes between different ethnic groups and aggression by the next of kin of those involved in terrorist activity against the population at large and law-enforcement officials, and lastly the threat to human life and limb, may, in a given historical context, justify the establishment of a particular legal regime, such as that provided for by section 14(1) of the Federal Act [on Interment and Burial of 12 January 1996, as amended], governing the burial of persons who escape prosecution in connection with terrorist activity on account of their death following the interception of a terrorist act. …

3.2. Action to minimise the informational and psychological impact of the terrorist act on the population, including the weakening of its propaganda effect, is one of the means necessary to protect public security and the morals, health, rights and legal interests of citizens. It therefore pursues exactly those aims for which the Constitution of the Russian Federation and international legal instruments permit restrictions on the relevant rights and freedoms.
The burial of those who have taken part in a terrorist act, in close proximity to the graves of the victims of their acts, and the observance of rites of burial and remembrance with the paying of respects, as a symbolic act of worship, serve as a means of propaganda for terrorist ideas and also cause offence to relatives of the victims of the acts in question, creating the preconditions for increasing inter-ethnic and religious tension.
In the conditions which have arisen in the Russian Federation as a result of the commission of a series of terrorist acts which produced numerous human victims, resulted in widespread negative social reaction and had a major impact on the collective consciousness, the return of the body to the relatives … may create a threat to social order and peace and to the rights and legal interests of other persons and their security, including incitement to hatred and incitement to engage in acts of vandalism, violence, mass disorder and clashes which may produce further victims. Meanwhile, the burial places of participants in terrorist acts may become a shrine for certain extremist individuals and be used by them as a means of propaganda for the ideology of terrorism and involvement in terrorist activity.
In such circumstances, the federal legislature may introduce special arrangements governing the burial of individuals whose death occurred as a result of the interception of a terrorist act in which they were taking part. 
Russian Federation, Constitutional Court, Burial case, 28 June 2007, §§ 2 and 3.1–3.2.

The constitutional and legal meaning of the existing norms presupposes the possibility of bringing court proceedings to challenge a decision to discontinue, on account of the deaths of the suspects, a criminal case against or [the] prosecution of participants in a terrorist act. Accordingly, they also presuppose an obligation on the court’s part to examine the substance of the complaint, that is, to verify [that] the decision and the conclusions therein [are lawful and well founded] as regards the participation of the persons concerned in a terrorist act, and to establish the absence of grounds for rehabilitating [the suspects] and discontinuing the criminal case. They thus entail an examination of the lawfulness of the application of the aforementioned restrictive measures. Until the entry into force of the court judgment the deceased’s remains cannot be buried; the relevant State bodies and officials must take all necessary measures to ensure that the bodies are disposed of in accordance with custom and tradition, in particular through the burial of the remains in the ground … or by [cremation], individually if possible. 
Russian Federation, Constitutional Court, Burial case, 28 June 2007, § 87.

Back to top
Malaysia
According to the Report on the Practice of Malaysia, the bodies of members of enemy forces and civilians that remain unclaimed, but whose religious persuasions are identified, are buried according to their religious rites. 
Report on the Practice of Malaysia, 1997, Chapter 5.1.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 2003, in a written reply to a question in the House of Lords, the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence, stated:
The Deployed Operating Instructions issued to all United Kingdom military units state that enemy dead are to be treated the same as UK military dead. This includes a direction that, where next of kin cannot be traced, the bodies are to be given the same funeral as would UK military personnel, subject to religious practices. 
United Kingdom, House of Lords, Written answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Hansard, 8 September 2003, Vol. 652, Written Answers, col. WA40.

Back to top
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) stated: “Interment should be carried out … according to the religious rites of the deceased.” 
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992), Final report, Annex Summaries and Conclusions, UN Doc. S/1994/674/Add.2 (Vol. I), 31 May 1995, § 503(b).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “Burial or cremation shall, as far as circumstances permit, be carried out … according to the rites of the religion to which the dead belonged.” 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 735.

Back to top
No data.
Quick navigation
Geneva Convention I
Article 17, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides:
Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. In case of cremation, the circumstances and reasons for cremation shall be stated in detail in the death certificate or on the authenticated list of the dead. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17, second para.

Geneva Convention III
Article 120, fifth paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides:
Bodies may be cremated only for imperative reasons of hygiene, on account of the religion of the deceased or in accordance with his express wish to this effect. In case of cremation, the fact shall be stated and the reasons given in the death certificate of the deceased. 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 120, fifth para.

Geneva Convention IV
Article 130, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides:
Bodies may be cremated only for imperative reasons of hygiene, on account of the religion of the deceased or in accordance with his expressed wish to this effect. In case of cremation, the fact shall be stated and the reasons given in the death certificate of the deceased. 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 130, second para.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides:
Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. In case of cremation, the reasons must be stated in detail on the death certificate or on the authenticated list of the dead. 
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, § 3.005.

Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) states: “The cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually in accordance with the religious rights and practices of the deceased.” 
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 999.

Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
9.104 The … cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually in accordance with the religious rites and practices of the deceased …
9.105 Bodies shall only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene and health, or for the requirements of the deceased. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, §§ 9.104–9.105.

Benin
Benin’s Military Manual (1995) provides: “Cremation shall only take place for imperative hygiene reasons and according to the deceased’s religion.” 
Benin, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Forces Armées du Bénin, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1995, Fascicule II, p. 12.

Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides: “Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for religious motives.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 9-6, § 59.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides: “Bodies must not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or because of the religion of the deceased. Reasons for cremation must be recorded.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 7, § 5.

Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked: “Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for religious motives.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels , Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 925.6.

Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states with regard to the funeral arrangements for prisoners of war (PW): “PW may only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene, on account of the religion of the PW or in accordance with a written request by the PW or by the Prisoners’ Representative on the PW’s behalf.” 
Canada, Prisoner of War Handling, Detainees, Interrogation and Tactical Questioning in International Operations, B-GJ-005-110/FP-020, National Defence Headquarters, 1 August 2004, § 3F17.5.b.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) instructs: “Bodies must not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or because of the religion of the deceased. Reasons for cremation must be recorded.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 2005, Rule 7, § 5.

Central African Republic
The Central African Republic’s Instructor’s Manual (1999) states in Volume 2 (Instruction for group and patrol leaders):
The dead … must then be … cremated … when the tactical situation permits and other circumstances (hygiene) permit. Cremations may be performed only for imperative reasons of hygiene and in accordance with the religion of the deceased. 
Central African Republic, Le Droit de la Guerre, Fascicule No. 2: Formation pour l’obtention du certificat technique No. 2 (Chef de Groupe), du certificat Inter-Armé (CIA), du certificat d’aptitude de Chef de Patrouille (CACP), Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Centrafricaines, 1999, Chapter III, Section II, § 2.3.

Chad
Chad’s Instructor’s Manual (2006) states that “a Graves Registration Service must be set up to record information [including] … the preservation of ashes”. 
Chad, Droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces armées et de sécurité, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 91.

France
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) states: “Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased.” 
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. 121.

Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) states:
Generally speaking, the enemy fallen are to be interred (in accordance with their religion’s customs insofar as possible), with cremation allowed only in cases where this is necessary hygienically or for religious reasons. 
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, p. 61.

Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states:
As a rule, the enemy’s fallen should be buried as per their religious rites as far as possible, and the bodies may only be burned in cases where this is necessary for reasons of hygiene or for religious reasons. 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 39.

Kenya
Kenya’s LOAC Manual (1997) provides: “Cremation shall take place only for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased.” 
Kenya, Law of Armed Conflict, Military Basic Course (ORS), 4 Précis, The School of Military Police, 1997, Précis No. 3, p. 11.

Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands states that “the cremation of a body shall be granted for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion” of the deceased. 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. VI-2.

The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “Cremation of a corpse is permitted for pressing hygienic or religious reasons.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0609.

Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “Bodies should only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene or for reasons connected with the religion of the deceased.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 86.b.

Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states: “Bodies should only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene or for reasons connected to the religion of the deceased.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 77(b), p. 277.

Poland
Poland’s Procedures Governing the Interment of Soldiers Killed in Action (2009) states: “In specific circumstances, bodies may be cremated – for example if that method is in accordance with the religious beliefs of the deceased, or if it is necessary to maintain hygiene and prevent the spread of disease.” 
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 2.1.

Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) provides: “Dead bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased.” 
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, § 168.

Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) stipulates that cremation is permitted only if required on religious grounds or for reasons of hygiene in cases where there is a risk of disease. 
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, Article 5.2.d.(6).

Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states: “Bodies may only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene or for reasons relating to the religion of the deceased.” 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) states: “Cremation is only permitted for imperative hygiene reasons or for religious motives.” 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 76, commentary.

Togo
Togo’s Military Manual (1996) provides: “Cremation shall only take place for imperative hygiene reasons and according to the deceased’s religion.” 
Togo, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Etat-major Général des Forces Armées Togolaises, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1996, Fascicule II, p. 12.

Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased.” 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, § 2.5.3.6.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) states:
Bodies must not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. When cremation is carried out the circumstances and reasons for it must be stated in detail on the death certificate. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 384.

The UK LOAC Pamphlet (1981) provides: “Cremation is allowed only on religious grounds or for imperative reasons of hygiene.” 
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 6, p. 22, § 5.

The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states:
Bodies must not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. When cremation is carried out, the circumstances and the reasons for it must be stated in the death certificate. The ashes must be respectfully treated and kept by the official graves registration service until properly disposed of according to the wishes of the home country. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 7.35.

United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) provides:
Bodies shall not be cremated except for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the religion of the deceased. In case of cremation, the circumstances and reasons for cremation shall be stated in detail in the death certificate or on the authenticated list of the dead. 
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, § 218.

The US Air Force Pamphlet (1976) provides: “Cremation is permitted only for imperative reasons of hygiene or for motives based on the deceased’s religion.” 
United States, Air Force Pamphlet 110-31, International Law – The Conduct of Armed Conflict and Air Operations, US Department of the Air Force, 1976, § 12-2(a).

The US Operational Law Handbook (1993) provides: “Parties may cremate the dead only for hygienic or religious reasons.” 
United States, Operational Law Handbook, JA 422, Center for Law and Military Operations and International Law Division, The Judge Advocate General’s School, United States Army, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-1781, 1993, p. Q-185.

Back to top
Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).

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).

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).

Ireland
Under Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 130 of the Geneva Convention IV, is a punishable offence. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).

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 Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108(a).

Back to top
Russian Federation
In 2007, in the Burial case, the Russian Federation’s Constitutional Court was called upon to rule on the constitutionality of two laws related to the interment of suspected terrorists whose deaths resulted from the interception of their terrorist acts. The Court held that the restrictive measures introduced by these laws were in conformity with the Constitution. The Court stated:
3.1 … [T]he interest in fighting terrorism, in preventing terrorism in general and specific terms and in providing redress for the effects of terrorist acts, coupled with the risk of mass disorder, clashes between different ethnic groups and aggression by the next of kin of those involved in terrorist activity against the population at large and law-enforcement officials, and lastly the threat to human life and limb, may, in a given historical context, justify the establishment of a particular legal regime, such as that provided for by section 14(1) of the Federal Act [on Interment and Burial of 12 January 1996, as amended], governing the burial of persons who escape prosecution in connection with terrorist activity on account of their death following the interception of a terrorist act. …

3.2. Action to minimise the informational and psychological impact of the terrorist act on the population, including the weakening of its propaganda effect, is one of the means necessary to protect public security and the morals, health, rights and legal interests of citizens. It therefore pursues exactly those aims for which the Constitution of the Russian Federation and international legal instruments permit restrictions on the relevant rights and freedoms.
The burial of those who have taken part in a terrorist act, in close proximity to the graves of the victims of their acts, and the observance of rites of burial and remembrance with the paying of respects, as a symbolic act of worship, serve as a means of propaganda for terrorist ideas and also cause offence to relatives of the victims of the acts in question, creating the preconditions for increasing inter-ethnic and religious tension.
In the conditions which have arisen in the Russian Federation as a result of the commission of a series of terrorist acts which produced numerous human victims, resulted in widespread negative social reaction and had a major impact on the collective consciousness, the return of the body to the relatives … may create a threat to social order and peace and to the rights and legal interests of other persons and their security, including incitement to hatred and incitement to engage in acts of vandalism, violence, mass disorder and clashes which may produce further victims. Meanwhile, the burial places of participants in terrorist acts may become a shrine for certain extremist individuals and be used by them as a means of propaganda for the ideology of terrorism and involvement in terrorist activity.
In such circumstances, the federal legislature may introduce special arrangements governing the burial of individuals whose death occurred as a result of the interception of a terrorist act in which they were taking part. 
Russian Federation, Constitutional Court, Burial case, 28 June 2007, §§ 3.1–3.2.

The constitutional and legal meaning of the existing norms presupposes the possibility of bringing court proceedings to challenge a decision to discontinue, on account of the deaths of the suspects, a criminal case against or prosecution of participants in a terrorist act. Accordingly, they also presuppose an obligation on the court’s part to examine the substance of the complaint, that is, to verify [that] the decision and the conclusions therein [are lawful and well founded] as regards the participation of the persons concerned in a terrorist act, and to establish the absence of grounds for rehabilitating [the suspects] and discontinuing the criminal case. They thus entail an examination of the lawfulness of the application of the aforementioned restrictive measures. Until the entry into force of the court judgment the deceased’s remains cannot be buried; the relevant State bodies and officials must take all necessary measures to ensure that the bodies are disposed of in accordance with custom and tradition, in particular through the burial of the remains in the ground ... or by [cremation]. 
Russian Federation, Constitutional Court, Burial case, 28 June 2007, § 87.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) noted, with respect to its investigation into mass graves:
A mass gravesite is a potential repository of evidence of mass killing of civilians and POWs [prisoners of war] …
The manner and method by which a mass grave is created may itself be a breach of the Geneva Conventions, as well as a violation of the customary regulations of armed conflict … Bodies should not be cremated except for hygiene reasons or for the religious reasons of the deceased. 
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780, 1992, Final report, Annex Summaries and Conclusions, UN Doc. S/1994/674/Add.2 (Vol. I), 31 May 1995, § 503(a) and (b).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Quick navigation
Geneva Convention I
Article 17, first paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides that parties to the conflict shall ensure that burial or cremation of the dead is “carried out individually as far as circumstances permit”. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17, first para.

Geneva Convention II
Article 20, first paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention II provides that parties to the conflict shall ensure that burial at sea of the dead be “carried out individually as far as circumstances permit”. 
Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 20, first para.

Geneva Convention III
Article 120, fifth paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides: “Deceased prisoners of war shall be buried in individual graves unless unavoidable circumstances require the use of collective graves.” 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 120, fifth para.

Geneva Convention IV
Article 130, second paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides: “Deceased internees shall be buried in individual graves unless unavoidable circumstances require the use of collective graves.” 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 130, second para.

NATO Standardization Agreement 2070
The 1999 NATO Standardization Agreement 2070 provides:
3. Whenever practicable, separate burial should be given to the remains, or even part remains, of each deceased person.

6. The following definitions are taken from the NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions for military use in English and French …:
a. Emergency Burial. A burial, usually on the battlefield, when conditions do not permit evacuation for burial in a cemetery.
b. Group Burial. A burial in a common grave of two or more individually unidentified remains.
c. Trench Burial. A method of burial resorted to when casualties are heavy whereby a trench is prepared and the individual remains are laid in it side by side, thus obviating the necessity of digging and filling individual graves.

12. In the case of trench and group burials a marker and list in a suitable container endorsed accordingly is to be placed at each end of the grave and the distance of the remains from the marker is to be shown against the relevant entry in the list. In group burials, the number of bodies buried must be recorded, with the names of the known but unidentifiable dead listed. 
Standardization Agreement 2070, Edition 4, Emergency War Burial Procedures, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Military Agency for Standardization, Brussels, 6 April 1999, §§ 3, 6 and 12.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides that the deceased must “be buried individually, so far as the circumstances so permit”. 
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, § 3.005; see also 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, § 6.04.

Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) states: “The burial or cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually.” 
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 999.

Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states: “The burial or cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually.” 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 9.104.

Benin
Benin’s Military Manual (1995) provides that the dead “shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually”. 
Benin, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Forces Armées du Bénin, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1995, Fascicule II, p. 12; see also Fascicule III, p. 5.

Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states that “after identification, the dead must be buried individually, if the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit”. 
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. 105.

Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides: “Parties to the conflict shall ensure that burial or cremation of the dead is carried out individually as far as circumstances permit.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 9-6, § 55.

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides: “The burial or cremation of the dead should be carried out individually as far as circumstances permit.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 7, § 5.

Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked: “Parties to the conflict shall ensure that burial or cremation of the dead is carried out individually as far as circumstances permit.” 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 925.2.

Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states with regard to the funeral arrangements for prisoners of war (PW): “Unless circumstances necessitate the use of collective graves, deceased PW are to be buried in individual graves.” 
Canada, Prisoner of War Handling, Detainees, Interrogation and Tactical Questioning in International Operations, B-GJ-005-110/FP-020, National Defence Headquarters, 1 August 2004, § 3F17.5.c(4).

Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) instructs: “The burial or cremation of the dead should be carried out individually as far as circumstances permit.” 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 2005, Rule 7, § 5.

Central African Republic
The Central African Republic’s Instructor’s Manual (1999) states in Volume 3 (Instruction for non-commissioned officers studying for the level 1 and 2 certificates and for future officers of the criminal police): “At all times, and especially following a battle, the dead must be … buried, if possible individually”. 
Central African Republic, Le Droit de la Guerre, Fascicule No. 3: Formation pour l’obtention du Brevet d’Armes No. 1, du Brevet d’Armes No. 2 et le stage d’Officier de Police Judiciaire (OPJ), Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Centrafricaines, 1999, Chapter I, Section II, § 2.3.

Croatia
Croatia’s Commanders’ Manual (1992) provides: “As a rule, the dead shall be … buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.” 
Croatia, Basic Rules of the Law of Armed Conflicts – Commanders’ Manual, Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, 1992, § 76.

France
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) reproduces Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I. 
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. 121.

Italy
Italy’s LOAC Elementary Rules Manual (1991) provides: “As a general rule, the dead shall be … buried, cremated or buried at sea individually”. 
Italy, Regole elementari di diritto di guerra, SMD-G-012, Stato Maggiore della Difesa, I Reparto, Ufficio Addestramento e Regolamenti, Rome, 1991, § 76.

Kenya
Kenya’s LOAC Manual (1997) states: “After identification, the dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually, when the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit.” 
Kenya, Law of Armed Conflict, Military Basic Course (ORS), 4 Précis, The School of Military Police, 1997, Précis No. 3, p. 11.

Madagascar
Madagascar’s Military Manual (1994) provides: “Generally, the dead shall be … buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.” 
Madagascar, Le Droit des Conflits Armés, Ministère des Forces Armées, August 1994, Fiche No. 7-O, § 23; see also Fiche No. 6-SO, § B.

Mexico
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009), in a section on the 1949 Geneva Convention I, states: “Parties to the conflict must ensure that burial on land or at sea or cremation of the dead … [is] carried out individually as far as circumstances permit”. 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 92.

Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands states: “Parties to the conflict are obliged to ensure that burial or cremation of the dead shall be carried out individually.” 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. VI-2.

The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “The parties to a conflict are bound to ensure that burial or cremation of the dead takes place separately as far as possible for each of the deceased”. 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0609.

Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “On land, bodies should be buried, individually if circumstances permit, rather than cremated.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 86.b.

Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states: “If circumstances permit, the dead must be buried individually [on land]. … At sea, the dead should be committed to the sea, individually if circumstances permit, if they cannot be taken to land.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 77(b), p. 277; see also p. 427.

Poland
Poland’s Procedures Governing the Interment of Soldiers Killed in Action (2009) states: “Whenever possible, the bodies of soldiers belonging to the national armed forces, allied forces or enemy forces, as well as the bodies of non-combatants, shall be buried in individual graves.” 
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 1.

Group burial
Burial in a common grave of two or more unidentified bodies or human remains.

Trench burial
The burial of bodies in collective graves, in the event of very heavy casualties, when the bodies or remains cannot be separated from one another, and cannot be identified.  
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 1.

Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) provides: “Whenever possible, dead bodies or the remains thereof shall be buried individually in accordance with the rites of the religion to which they belonged.” 
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, § 168.

Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.” 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states that “the dead must be buried or cremated individually”. 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) states: “If possible, corpses shall be buried separately.” 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 76, commentary.

Togo
Togo’s Military Manual (1996) provides that the dead “shall be buried, incinerated or buried at sea individually”. 
Togo, Le Droit de la Guerre, III fascicules, Etat-major Général des Forces Armées Togolaises, Ministère de la Défense nationale, 1996 Fascicule II, p. 12; see also Fascicule III, p. 5.

Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
2.5.3.5. The best spaces of open and dry terrain shall be chosen for gravesites and separate graves.

2.5.3.6. As much as possible, the burial of the dead bodies or their remains shall be done individually. 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, §§ 2.5.3.5 and 2.5.3.6.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides: “The belligerents must make provision for … interment, in individual graves so far as possible”. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 383.

The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states: “The remains of the dead are to be honourably interred (unless burial at sea is appropriate), in so far as possible in individual graves”. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 7.35.

United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) provides: “Parties to the conflict shall ensure burial or cremation of the dead, carried out individually as far as circumstances permit.” 
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, § 218; see also Air Force Pamphlet 110-31, International Law – The Conduct of Armed Conflict and Air Operations, US Department of the Air Force, 1976, § 12-2(a).

Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Military Manual (1988) stipulates that bodies should be buried individually. 
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of, Propisi o Primeri Pravila Medjunarodnog Ratnog Prava u Oruzanim Snagama SFRJ, PrU-2, Savezni Sekretarijat za Narodnu Odbranu (Pravna Uprava), 1988, Article 167.

Back to top
Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).

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).

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).

Ireland
Under Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 20 of the Geneva Convention II, Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 130 of the Geneva Convention IV, is a punishable offence. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).

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 Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108(a).

Back to top
Colombia
In 1995, Colombia’s Council of State held that the deceased must be buried individually, subject to all the requirements of the law, and not in mass graves. 
Colombia, Council of State, Administrative Case No. 10941, Judgment, 6 September 1995.

Russian Federation
In 2007, in the Burial case, the Russian Federation’s Constitutional Court was called upon to rule on the constitutionality of two laws related to the interment of suspected terrorists whose deaths resulted from the interception of their terrorist acts. The Court held that the restrictive measures introduced by these laws were in conformity with the Constitution. The Court stated:
3.1 … [T]he interest in fighting terrorism, in preventing terrorism in general and specific terms and in providing redress for the effects of terrorist acts, coupled with the risk of mass disorder, clashes between different ethnic groups and aggression by the next of kin of those involved in terrorist activity against the population at large and law-enforcement officials, and lastly the threat to human life and limb, may, in a given historical context, justify the establishment of a particular legal regime, such as that provided for by section 14(1) of the Federal Act [on Interment and Burial of 12 January 1996, as amended], governing the burial of persons who escape prosecution in connection with terrorist activity on account of their death following the interception of a terrorist act. …

3.2. Action to minimise the informational and psychological impact of the terrorist act on the population, including the weakening of its propaganda effect, is one of the means necessary to protect public security and the morals, health, rights and legal interests of citizens. It therefore pursues exactly those aims for which the Constitution of the Russian Federation and international legal instruments permit restrictions on the relevant rights and freedoms.
The burial of those who have taken part in a terrorist act, in close proximity to the graves of the victims of their acts, and the observance of rites of burial and remembrance with the paying of respects, as a symbolic act of worship, serve as a means of propaganda for terrorist ideas and also cause offence to relatives of the victims of the acts in question, creating the preconditions for increasing inter-ethnic and religious tension.
In the conditions which have arisen in the Russian Federation as a result of the commission of a series of terrorist acts which produced numerous human victims, resulted in widespread negative social reaction and had a major impact on the collective consciousness, the return of the body to the relatives … may create a threat to social order and peace and to the rights and legal interests of other persons and their security, including incitement to hatred and incitement to engage in acts of vandalism, violence, mass disorder and clashes which may produce further victims. Meanwhile, the burial places of participants in terrorist acts may become a shrine for certain extremist individuals and be used by them as a means of propaganda for the ideology of terrorism and involvement in terrorist activity.
In such circumstances, the federal legislature may introduce special arrangements governing the burial of individuals whose death occurred as a result of the interception of a terrorist act in which they were taking part. 
Russian Federation, Constitutional Court, Burial case, 28 June 2007, §§ 3.1–3.2.

The constitutional and legal meaning of the existing norms presupposes the possibility of bringing court proceedings to challenge a decision to discontinue, on account of the deaths of the suspects, a criminal case against or prosecution of participants in a terrorist act. Accordingly, they also presuppose an obligation on the court’s part to examine the substance of the complaint, that is, to verify [that] the decision and the conclusions therein [are lawful and well founded] as regards the participation of the persons concerned in a terrorist act, and to establish the absence of grounds for rehabilitating [the suspects] and discontinuing the criminal case. They thus entail an examination of the lawfulness of the application of the aforementioned restrictive measures. Until the entry into force of the court judgment the deceased’s remains cannot be buried; the relevant State bodies and officials must take all necessary measures to ensure that the bodies are disposed of … through the burial of the remains in the ground ... or by [cremation], individually, if possible. 
Russian Federation, Constitutional Court, Burial case, 28 June 2007, § 87.

Back to top
Chad
In 2007, in its initial report to the Committee against Torture, Chad stated: “[O]n 21 March 1980 Hissène Habré’s Armed Forces of the North (FAN) and Goukouni Weddeye’s Popular Armed Forces (FAP) clashed in N’Djamena. When Habré retreated a mass grave was discovered close to his home in N’Djamena.” 
Chad, Initial report to the Committee against Torture, 22 September 2008, UN Doc. CAT/C/TCD/1, submitted 4 September 2007, § 19.

Back to top
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) noted, with respect to its investigation into mass graves:
A mass gravesite is a potential repository of evidence of mass killings of civilians and POWs [prisoners of war] …
The manner and method by which a mass grave is created may itself be a breach of the Geneva Conventions, as well as a violation of the customary regulations of armed conflict … Parties to a conflict must also ensure that deceased persons are … buried in individual graves, as far apart as circumstances permit. 
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992), Final report, Annex Summaries and Conclusions, UN Doc. S/1994/674/Add.2 (Vol. I), 31 May 1995, § 503(a) and (b).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces the rule that “burial or cremation shall, as far as circumstances permit, be carried out individually”. 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 735.

Back to top
No data.
Quick navigation
Geneva Convention I
Article 17, third paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides that graves shall be “grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased”. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17, third para.

Geneva Convention III
Article 120, fourth paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides: “Whenever possible, deceased prisoners of war who depended on the same Power shall be interred in the same place.” 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 120, fourth para.

NATO Standardization Agreement 2070
Paragraph 9 of the 1999 NATO Standardization Agreement 2070 states: “Burials are to be grouped by nationalities. Different areas for separate graves, trench or group burials are to be allotted to each nationality.” 
Standardization Agreement 2070, Edition 4, Emergency War Burial Procedures, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Military Agency for Standardization, Brussels, 6 April 1999, § 9.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides that graves “shall be grouped if possible according to the nationality of the dead”. 
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, § 3.005.

Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides that the graves of the deceased shall “be grouped by nationality”. 
Australia Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 999.

Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states that the graves of the deceased shall be “grouped by nationality”. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 9.104.

Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructors’ Manual (1992) provides that the deceased shall be buried by nationality. 
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. 119, § 431(2).

Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (2006), under the heading “The Case of Deceased Prisoners of War”, states: “The deceased of the same nationality must be buried at the same place.” 
Cameroon, Droit des conflits armés et droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces de défense, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 265, § 621.

Canada
Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states with regard to the funeral arrangements for prisoners of war (PW): “Wherever possible, deceased PW who depended on the same Power are [to be] buried in the same location.” 
Canada, Prisoner of War Handling, Detainees, Interrogation and Tactical Questioning in International Operations, B-GJ-005-110/FP-020, National Defence Headquarters, 1 August 2004, § 3F17.5.c(3).

Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands provides: “Graves shall be grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased.” 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. VI-2.

The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “Mortal remains must be located according to nationality, as far as possible.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0610.

Poland
Poland’s Procedures Governing the Interment of Soldiers Killed in Action (2009) states: “When selecting the burial site and digging the graves, the aim should be to ensure that: … [they] are grouped according to nationality”. 
Poland, Norma Obronna NO-02-A053:2004, Działania wojenne Procedury pochówku poległych i zmarłych, enacted by decision No. 134/MON related to the Approval and Enforcement of Regulatory Instruments in Respect of State Defence and Security, 21 April 2009, published in the Official Gazette of the Ministry of National Defence, No. 8, Item 99, April 2009, Section 2.2.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states: “Graves must be respected and properly maintained. They must be marked so that they may always be found and should, if possible, be grouped according to the nationality of the deceased.” 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 7.36.

United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) provides that the “graves [of the dead] are … grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased”. 
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, § 218.

Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Military Manual (1988) provides that military graves should, if possible, be grouped by nationality. 
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of, Propisi o Primeri Pravila Medjunarodnog Ratnog Prava u Oruzanim Snagama SFRJ, PrU-2, Savezni Sekretarijat za Narodnu Odbranu (Pravna Uprava), 1988, Article 168.

Back to top
Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).

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).

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).

Ireland
Under Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I and Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III, is a punishable offence. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).

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 Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108(a).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) stated, with respect to its investigation into mass graves: “Victims should be grouped by nationality.” 
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780, 1992, Final report, Annex Summaries and Conclusions, UN Doc. S/1994/674/Add.2 (Vol. I), 31 May 1995, § 503(b).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
No data.
Back to top
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “Wherever possible, the dead of the same nationality shall be buried at the same place.” 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 735.

Back to top
No data.
Quick navigation
Geneva Convention (1929)
Article 4, fifth paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva Convention provides:
[Belligerents] shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred, that their graves are respected and marked so that they may always be found. 
Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field, Geneva, 27 July 1929, Article 4, fifth para.

Geneva POW Convention
Article 76, third paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva POW Convention provides that belligerents shall ensure that the graves of prisoners of war are “treated with respect and suitably maintained”. 
Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 27 July 1929, Article 76, third para.

Geneva Convention I
Article 17, third paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides:
[Parties to the conflict] shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are respected, grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased, properly maintained and marked so that they may always be found. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 17, third para.

Geneva Convention III
Article 120, fourth paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides:
The detaining authorities shall ensure that prisoners of war who have died in captivity are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, and that their graves are respected, suitably maintained and marked so as to be found at any time. 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 120, fourth para.

Geneva Convention IV
Article 130, first paragraph, of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides:
The detaining authorities shall ensure that internees who die while interned are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, and that their graves are respected, properly maintained, and marked in such a way that they can always be recognized. 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 130, first para.

Additional Protocol I
Article 34 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
1. The remains of persons who have died for reasons related to occupation or in detention resulting from occupation or hostilities and those of persons not nationals of the country in which they have died as a result of hostilities shall be respected, and the gravesites of all such persons shall be respected [and] maintained … as provided for in Article 130 of the Fourth Convention, where their remains or gravesites would not receive more favourable consideration under the Conventions and this Protocol.
2. As soon as circumstances and the relations between the adverse Parties permit, … [they] shall conclude agreements in order:

(b) to protect and maintain such gravesites permanently;

3. In the absence of [such] agreements … and if the home country of such deceased is not willing to arrange at its expense for the maintenance of such gravesites, the High Contracting Party in whose territory the gravesites are situated may offer to facilitate the return of the remains of the deceased to the home country. Where such an offer has not been accepted the High Contracting Party may, after the expiry of five years from the date of the offer and upon due notice to the home country, adopt the arrangements laid down in its own laws relating to cemeteries and graves. 
Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), Geneva, 8 June 1977, Article 34. Article 34 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.37, 24 May 1977, p. 71.

Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Viet-Nam
Article 8(b) of the 1973 Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Viet-Nam contained provisions requiring the parties to take care of the graves of the dead so as to facilitate the exhumation and repatriation of the remains. 
Agreement on Ending the War and Restoring Peace in Viet-Nam, signed on behalf of the United States of America, the Republic of Viet-Nam, the Democratic Republic of Viet-Nam, and the Provisional Revolutionary Government of South Viet-Nam, Paris, 27 January 1973, Article 8(b).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides that graves shall be “respected … and properly maintained”. 
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, § 3.005.

Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides that the graves of the deceased “shall be respected”. 
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, § 999.

Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states that, for the deceased, “their graves [shall be] respected”. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 9.104.

Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states that “[t]he graves must be respected [and] properly maintained”. 
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. 105.

Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) states that the grave sites of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities or while in occupation or detention in relation thereto shall be “properly respected [and] maintained”. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 9-6, § 54.

Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked:
The remains of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities or while in occupation or detention in relation thereto shall be respected, and their gravesites properly respected, maintained and marked. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 925.1.

Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states with regard to the funeral arrangements for prisoners of war: “Their graves are [to be] respected, suitably maintained and marked so that they may be found at any time.”  
Canada, Prisoner of War Handling, Detainees, Interrogation and Tactical Questioning in International Operations, B-GJ-005-110/FP-020, National Defence Headquarters, 1 August 2004, § 3F17.5.c(2).

Chad
Chad’s Instructor’s Manual (2006) states: “The graves of the dead must be respected and maintained.” 
Chad, Droit international humanitaire, Manuel de l’instructeur en vigueur dans les forces armées et de sécurité, Ministère de la Défense, Présidence de la République, Etat-major des Armées, 2006, p. 94.

Croatia
Croatia’s LOAC Compendium (1991) provides that one of the requirements after a conflict is to “respect … and maintain gravesites”. 
Croatia, Compendium “Law of Armed Conflicts”, Republic of Croatia, Ministry of Defence, 1991, p. 21.

France
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) reproduces Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I. 
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. 121.

Hungary
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) provides that one of the requirements after a conflict is to “respect … and maintain gravesites”. 
Hungary, A Hadijog, Jegyzet a Katonai, Föiskolák Hallgatói Részére, Magyar Honvédség Szolnoki Repülötiszti Föiskola, 1992, p. 38.

Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) states that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) maintain “a cemetery in the north for the interment of the bodies of terrorists killed in clashes with the IDF”. 
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, p. 61.

Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states: “The IDF [Israel Defense Forces] maintains a cemetery where the bodies are laid to rest of terrorists killed in skirmishes with the IDF.” 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 39.

Mexico
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009) states that a “series of rules [included in the 1977 Additional Protocol I] concerns the duty to … conserve the remains of the dead.” 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 274.

Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands provides: “Graves must be properly maintained.” 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, p. VI-3.

The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “The graves must be respected and maintained.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0610.

New Zealand
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) provides that the grave sites of the dead shall be “properly respected, maintained and marked”. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 1012(1).

Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “The gravesites of the dead must be respected and properly maintained, wherever they are.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 68.b.

Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states: “The gravesites of the dead must be respected and properly maintained, wherever they are.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 69(b), p. 269.

Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) provides:
Gravesites and individual graves shall be located in open and dry areas (public gardens, squares, forest and grove edgings, road crossings). After proper recording, gravesites (graves) shall be conveyed by record to the local authorities or military commandants who shall henceforth be responsible for their maintenance. 
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, § 168.

Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides: “The graves of the dead shall be respected and properly maintained, wherever they are located.” 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states: “The gravesites of the dead must be respected and properly maintained, wherever they are.” 
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, § 5.2.d.(6).

Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) provides that “graves shall be respected” and “properly maintained”. 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 71(2) and Article 76, commentary.

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides: “Graves must be respected and properly maintained.” 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 383.

The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states:
7.36. Graves must be respected and properly maintained. They must be marked so that they may always be found and should, if possible, be grouped according to the nationality of the deceased. Graves registration services must be officially established at the outbreak of hostilities and, as soon as circumstances permit, the adverse parties and any other concerned authorities are required to seek agreement for:
a. The permanent protection and maintenance of grave sites;
b. Access to those grave sites by relatives of the deceased and the representatives of the official graves registration services;
c. The return of remains of the deceased to the home state on that state’s request or, unless that state objects, on the request of the next of kin.
7.36.1. In the absence of agreements relating either to protection and maintenance of grave sites or for the return of the deceased, the authorities of the territory in which the grave sites are situated may (a) offer to facilitate the return of the remains to the home state; and (b) if such an offer is not accepted within five years from the date of the offer, and after due notice, adopt arrangements for dealing with such remains in accordance with their own domestic laws relating to cemeteries and graves. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, §§ 7.36–7.36.1.

United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) provides that the graves of the dead “are respected [and] properly maintained”. 
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, § 218.

The Annotated Supplement to the US Naval Handbook (1997) requires that “as soon as circumstances permit, arrangement be made to … protect and maintain such sites permanently”. 
United States, Annotated Supplement to the Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, prepared by the Oceans Law and Policy Department, Center for Naval Warfare Studies, Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island, November 1997, § 11.4, footnote 19.

Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Military Manual (1988) provides that the graves of the deceased shall be respected. 
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of, Propisi o Primeri Pravila Medjunarodnog Ratnog Prava u Oruzanim Snagama SFRJ, PrU-2, Savezni Sekretarijat za Narodnu Odbranu (Pravna Uprava), 1988, Article 168.

Back to top
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan’s Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War (1995) provides that “the places of burial of [the dead] are respected”. 
Azerbaijan, Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War, 1995, Article 29(3).

Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).

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).

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).

Ireland
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, provides that any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 130 of the Geneva Convention IV, and of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including violations of Article 34, are punishable offences. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).

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 Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … [and in] the two additional protocols to these Conventions … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108.

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
United States of America
In 1987, the Deputy Legal Adviser of the US Department of State affirmed: “We support … the principle … to maintain [grave] sites permanently”. 
United States, Remarks of Michael J. Matheson, Deputy Legal Adviser, US Department of State, The Sixth Annual American Red Cross-Washington College of Law Conference on International Humanitarian Law: A Workshop on Customary International Law and the 1977 Protocols Additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, American University Journal of International Law and Policy, Vol. 2, 1987, p. 424.

Back to top
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 2007 on certain practices that contribute to fuelling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, the UN General Assembly:
Expresses concern at recurring attempts to desecrate or demolish monuments erected in remembrance of those who fought against Nazism during the Second World War, as well as to unlawfully exhume or remove the remains of such persons, and urges States in this regard to fully comply with their relevant obligations, inter alia, under article 34 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 62/142, 18 December 2007, § 3, voting record: 130-2-53-7.

UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) noted, with respect to its investigation into mass graves, that the graves of victims should be maintained. 
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780, 1992, Final report, Annex Summaries and Conclusions, UN Doc. S/1994/674/Add.2 (Vol. I), 31 May 1995, § 503(b).

Back to top
No data.
Back to top
International Conference of the Red Cross (1973)
The 22nd International Conference of the Red Cross in 1973 adopted a resolution on the missing and dead in armed conflicts in which it called on parties to armed conflicts “during hostilities and after cessation of hostilities, to help locate and care for the graves of the dead”. 
22nd International Conference of the Red Cross, Teheran, 8–15 November 1973, Res. V.

Back to top
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
In the Neira Alegría and Others case in 1995, the government of Peru informed the Inter-American Court of Human Rights that a certain cemetery under discussion was official and permanent in nature, and that the bodies of persons who died as a result of disproportionate use of force in putting down a prison mutiny would not therefore be moved except in accordance with regulations on the subject and at the request of an interested party. 
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Neira Alegría and Others case, Judgment, 19 January 1995, § 36.

Back to top
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that “gravesites of deceased persons shall be respected and maintained, wherever located”. 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 261; see also § 230.

Back to top
Amnesty International
In 1996, in the context of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Amnesty International called for the Implementation Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina (IFOR) to protect mass grave sites. 
Amnesty International, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Amnesty International renews calls for IFOR to comply with international law, AI Index: EUR 63/11/96, 18 April 1996, p. 4.