Practice Relating to Rule 92. Mutilation and Medical, Scientific or Biological Experiments

Geneva Conventions (1949)
Common Article 3(1)(a) of the 1949 Geneva Conventions provides that mutilation of persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause is prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3(1)(a); 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 3(1)(a); Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3 (1)(a); Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 3(1)(a).
Geneva Convention I
Article 12 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides that wounded and sick members of the armed forces in the field shall not be subjected to biological experiments. According to Article 50, conducting biological experiments on the wounded and sick is a grave breach of the Convention. 
Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Articles 12 and 50.
Geneva Convention II
Article 12 of the 1949 Geneva Convention II provides that wounded, sick and shipwrecked members of the armed forces at sea shall not be subjected to biological experiments. According to Article 51, conducting biological experiments on the wounded, sick and shipwrecked is a grave breach of the Convention. 
Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Articles 12 and 51.
Geneva Convention III
Article 13 of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides:
No prisoner of war may be subject to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest. 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 13.
According to Article 130, conducting biological experiments on prisoners of war is a grave breach of the Convention. 
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Article 130.
Geneva Convention IV
Under Article 32 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV, “mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person” are prohibited. According to Article 147, conducting biological experiments on protected persons is a grave breach of the Convention. 
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Articles 32 and 147.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Article 7 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides: “No one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.” 
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly, Res. 2200 A (XXI), 16 December 1966, Article 7.
Additional Protocol I
Article 11 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I provides:
1. The physical or mental health and integrity of persons who are in the power of the adverse Party or who are interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty as a result of a situation referred to in Article 1 shall not be endangered by any unjustified act or omission. Accordingly, it is prohibited to subject the persons described in this Article to any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards which would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the Party conducting the procedure and who are in no way deprived of liberty.
2. It is, in particular, prohibited to carry out on such persons, even with their consent:
(a) physical mutilations;
(b) medical or scientific experiments;
(c) removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, except where these acts are justified in conformity with the conditions provided for in paragraph 1.
3. Exceptions to the prohibition in paragraph 2 (c) may be made only in the case of donations of blood for transfusion or of skin for grafting, provided that they are given voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement, and then only for therapeutic purposes, under conditions consistent with generally accepted medical standards and controls designed for the benefit of both the donor and the recipient.
4. Any wilful act or omission which seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of any person who is in the power of a Party other than the one on which he depends and which either violates any of the prohibitions in paragraphs 1 and 2 or fails to comply with the requirements of paragraph 3 shall be a grave breach of this Protocol.
5. The persons described in paragraph 1 have the right to refuse any surgical operation. In case of refusal, medical personnel shall endeavour to obtain a written statement to that effect, signed or acknowledged by the patient.
6. Each Party to the conflict shall keep a medical record for every donation of blood for transfusion or skin for grafting by persons referred to in paragraph 1, if that donation is made under the responsibility of that Party. In addition, each Party to the conflict shall endeavour to keep a record of all medical procedures undertaken with respect to any person who is interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty as a result of a situation referred to in Article 1. These records shall be available at all times for inspection by the Protecting Power. 
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 11. Article 11 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.37, 24 May 1977, p. 69.
Additional Protocol I
Article 75(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I prohibits, inter alia, acts of mutilation. 
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 75(2). Article 75 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.43, 27 May 1977, p. 250.
Additional Protocol I
According to Article 85 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, conducting biological experiments on protected persons is a grave breach of this instrument. 
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 85. Article 85 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.44, 30 May 1977, p. 291, § 72.
Additional Protocol II
Article 4(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II prohibits, inter alia, acts of mutilation. 
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 4(2). Article 4 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VII, CDDH/SR.50, 3 June 1977, p. 90.
Additional Protocol II
Article 5(2)(e) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides:
It is prohibited to subject the persons described in this Article to any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned, and which is not consistent with the generally accepted medical standards applied to free persons under similar medical circumstances. 
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 5(2)(e). Article 5 was adopted by consensus. CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VII, CDDH/SR.50, 3 June 1977, p. 92.
ICC Statute
According to Article 8(2)(a)(ii) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “biological experiments” committed against persons protected under the 1949 Geneva Conventions are war crimes. 
Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted by the UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, 17 July 1998, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9, Article 8(2)(a)(ii).
ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(x) and (e)(xi) of the 1998 ICC Statute, the following is a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts:
Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party [or another party to the conflict] to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons. 
Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted by the UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, 17 July 1998, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9, Article 8(2)(b)(x) and (e)(xi).
Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone
Article 3 of the 2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone provides that the Court is competent to prosecute violations of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, which include “mutilation”. 
Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, annexed to the 2002 Agreement on the Special Court for Sierra Leone, Freetown, 16 January 2002, annexed to Letter dated 6 March 2002 from the UN Secretary-General to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/2002/246, 8 March 2002, p. 29, Article 3.
UN-Cambodia Agreement Concerning the Prosecution under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed During the Period of Democratic Kampuchea
Article 9 of the 2003 UN-Cambodia Agreement Concerning the Prosecution under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed During the Period of Democratic Kampuchea provides:
The subject-matter jurisdiction of the Extraordinary Chambers shall be the crime of genocide as defined in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, crimes against humanity as defined in the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and such other crimes as defined in Chapter II of the Law on the Establishment of the Extraordinary Chambers as promulgated on 10 August 2001. 
Agreement between the UN and the Royal Government of Cambodia Concerning the Prosecution under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed During the Period of Democratic Kampuchea, Phnom Penh, 6 June 2003, Article 9.
In accordance with Article 2 of the Agreement, Cambodia’s Law on the Establishment of the ECCC (2001), as amended, further implements these provisions. 
Agreement between the UN and the Royal Government of Cambodia Concerning the Prosecution under Cambodian Law of Crimes Committed During the Period of Democratic Kampuchea, Phnom Penh, 6 June 2003, Article 2.
Lieber Code
Article 56 of the 1863 Lieber Code provides: “A prisoner of war is subject to no punishment for being a public enemy, nor is any revenge wreaked upon him by the intentional infliction of any suffering … by mutilation … or any other barbarity.” 
Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States in the Field, prepared by Francis Lieber, promulgated as General Order No. 100 by President Abraham Lincoln, Washington D.C., 24 April 1863, Article 56.
Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment
Principle 22 of the 1988 Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment provides: “No detained or imprisoned person shall, even with his consent, be subjected to any medical or scientific experimentation which may be detrimental to his health.” 
Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, adopted by the UN General Assembly, Res. 43/173, 9 December 1988, Principle 22.
ILC Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (1991)
According to Article 22(2)(a) of the 1991 ILC Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, biological experiments are considered to be an exceptionally serious war crime and a serious violation of the principles and rules of international law applicable in armed conflict. 
Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, adopted by the International Law Commission, reprinted in Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its forty-third session, 29 April–19 July 1991, UN Doc. A/46/10, 1991, Article 22(2)(a).
ICTY Statute
Under Article 2(b) of the 1993 ICTY Statute, the Tribunal is competent to prosecute individuals who have carried out biological experiments on persons protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention. 
Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, adopted by the UN Security Council, Res. 827, 25 May 1993, as amended by Res. 1166, 13 May 1998 and by Res. 1329, 30 November 2000, Article 2(b).
ICTR Statute
According to Article 4(a) of the 1994 ICTR Statute, the Tribunal has jurisdiction to try acts in violation of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including “mutilation”. 
Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan citizens responsible for genocide and other such violations committed in the territory of neighbouring States between 1 January 1994 and 31 December 1994, adopted by the UN Security Council, Res. 955, 8 November 1994, as amended by Res. 1165, 30 April 1998, and by Res. 1329, 30 November 2000, Article 4(a).
ILC Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (1996)
Article 18(k) of the 1996 ILC Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind provides that “inhumane acts which severely damage physical or mental integrity, health or human dignity, such as mutilation and severe bodily harm” constitute crimes against humanity. Article 20(a)(ii) states that biological experiments are war crimes. Article 20(f)(i) states that “mutilation” committed in violation of international humanitarian law applicable in armed conflict not of an international character is a war crime. 
Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind, adopted by the International Law Commission, reprinted in Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its forty-eighth session, 6 May–26 July 1996, UN Doc. A/51/10, 1996, Articles 18(k), 20(a)(ii) and 20(f)(i).
Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(1) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that mutilation shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat. Article 4(9) adds that every possible measure shall be taken to prevent the mutilation of the wounded and sick. 
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(1) and 4(9).
UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin
According to Section 7(2) of the 1999 UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin, mutilation of persons not, or no longer, taking part in military operations and persons placed hors de combat is prohibited at any time and in any place. 
Observance by United Nations Forces of International Humanitarian Law, Secretary-General’s Bulletin, UN Secretariat, UN Doc. ST/SGB/1999/13, 6 August 1999, Section 7(2).
UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(x) and (e)(xi), the following is a war crime in both international and non-international armed conflicts:
Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party [or another party to the conflict] to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons. 
Regulation on the Establishment of Panels with Exclusive Jurisdiction over Serious Criminal Offences, UN Doc. UNTAET/REG/2000/15, Dili, 6 June 2000, Section 6(1)(b)(x) and (e)(xi).
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) stipulates that prisoners of war “cannot be subjected to physical mutilation and to medical and scientific experiments of any kind not justified by medical treatment”. 
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, § 2.013.
The manual adds: “It is especially prohibited to subject [the wounded and sick] … to biological experiments.” The prohibition also applies to civilians. 
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, §§ 3.001 (wounded and sick) and 4.012 (civilians).
Argentina
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1989) provides that it is prohibited to subject the wounded and sick to medical procedures not indicated by their state of health. 
Argentina, Leyes de Guerra, PC-08-01, Público, Edición 1989, Estado Mayor Conjunto de las Fuerzas Armadas, aprobado por Resolución No. 489/89 del Ministerio de Defensa, 23 April 1990, § 2.04.
This prohibition extends to mutilation or scientific experiments on prisoners of war and civilians in occupied territories. 
Argentina, Leyes de Guerra, PC-08-01, Público, Edición 1989, Estado Mayor Conjunto de las Fuerzas Armadas, aprobado por Resolución No. 489/89 del Ministerio de Defensa, 23 April 1990, § 3.12 (POWs) and § 4.29 (civilians in occupied territory).
The manual categorizes such acts as a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
Argentina, Leyes de Guerra, PC-08-01, Público, Edición 1989, Estado Mayor Conjunto de las Fuerzas Armadas, aprobado por Resolución No. 489/89 del Ministerio de Defensa, 23 April 1990, § 8.03.
Australia
Australia’s Commanders’ Guide (1994) provides that “performing physical mutilations, conducting medical or scientific experimentation and removing tissue or organs for transplantation without consent” is a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
Australia, Law of Armed Conflict, Commanders’ Guide, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 Supplement 1 – Interim Edition, 7 March 1994, § 1305(m).
Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides that performing physical mutilations, conducting medical or biological experiments or scientific experimentation and removing tissue and organs for transplantation without consent on the wounded and sick, POWs and protected persons is prohibited and is considered a war crime. The manual refers to persons protected under the 1949 Geneva Conventions or the 1977 Additional Protocols. 
Australia, Manual on Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Force Publication, Operations Series, ADFP 37 – Interim Edition, 1994, §§ 953, 990, 1008, 1219 and 1315(m).
Australia
Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
[With regard to protected persons, the] following acts are prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever:
• Violence to the life, health or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:
– mutilation; … and
• threats to commit any of the foregoing acts. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 9.46.
The manual also states with regard to the general treatment of protected persons in both their own territory and occupied territory that “biological experiments … are … forbidden”. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 9.58.
In its chapter on “Prisoners of War and Detained Persons”, the manual states: “No PW [prisoners of war] may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind ”. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 10.20.
In its chapter on “Occupation”, the manual states with regard to inhabitants of occupied territory:
Any measure of such a character as to cause the physical suffering or extermination of protected persons … is prohibited. That prohibition applies … to … mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, § 12.37.
In its chapter on “Compliance”, the manual states:
13.25 Grave breaches under the Geneva Conventions consist of any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Convention:
• … biological experiments
13.26 G. P. I [1977 Additional Protocol I] extends the definition of grave breaches to include the following:
• any wilful and unjustified act or omission which seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of any person who is in the power of a party other than the one on which they depend;
13.30 Among other war crimes generally recognised as forming part of the customary LOAC are:
• mutilation or other maltreatment of dead bodies. 
Australia, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Australian Defence Doctrine Publication 06.4, Australian Defence Headquarters, 11 May 2006, §§ 13.25, 13.26 and 13.30.
The LOAC Manual (2006) replaces both the Defence Force Manual (1994) and the Commanders’ Guide (1994).
Belgium
Belgium’s Law of War Manual (1983) provides that carrying out medical and biological experiments on protected persons is a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
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. 55.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
The Instructions to the Muslim Fighter (1993) issued by the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1993 stated: “Islam likewise forbids the … mutilation of enemy wounded.” 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Instructions to the Muslim Fighter, booklet, ABiH 3rd Corps, 1993, cited in ICTY, Hadžihasanović and Others Case, Amended Indictment, 11 January 2002, § 24, § c.
Burkina Faso
Burkina Faso’s Disciplinary Regulations (1994) provides that it is prohibited to mutilate the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners and civilians. 
Burkina Faso, Règlement de Discipline Générale dans les Forces Armées, Décret No. 94-159/IPRES/DEF, Ministère de la Défense, 1994, Article 35(2).
Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) lists “biological experiments” as a “grave breach” of IHL. 
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. 26.
Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (2006), under the heading “Responsibility for Acts or Omissions of which Subordinates Are Accused”, states that a commander may be held responsible for any act of “mutilation” committed by his subordinates. 
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. 99, § 361; see also p. 141, § 421.
Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides that it is a violation of the 1949 Geneva Convention I to “subject the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, even with their consent, to physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments, or the removal of tissue for transplantation, except where justified by their medical needs”. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 9-2, § 21.
The manual prohibits similar acts with regard to persons protected by the 1949 Geneva Convention IV. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 11-4, § 33.
The manual further provides that it is a war crime and a grave breach of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to subject a person to a medical procedure that
is not indicated by the state of health of that person, and … is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards applicable in similar circumstances to persons who are nationals of the party conducting the procedure and who are in no way deprived of liberty [and to subject a person] to medical or scientific experiments, [or] the removal of tissue for transplantation, except for donations of blood or of skin for grafting given voluntarily and in conformity with generally accepted medical standards, unless justified by the medical needs of the person. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 16-2, § 15(a)–(b).
Canada
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked:
907. Treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked
1. The wounded, sick and shipwrecked are to be protected, respected, treated humanely and cared for by the Detaining Power without any adverse discrimination.
2. Attempts upon their lives and violence against their persons are prohibited. They shall not be murdered or subjected to biological experiments, left without proper medical care and attention or exposed to conditions, which might result in contagion or infection. The term “wounded, sick and shipwrecked”, includes civilians.
909. Medical experiments
1. It is prohibited to subject the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, even with their consent, to physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments, or the removal of tissue for transplantation, except where justified by their medical needs.
910. Blood transfusions and skin grafts
1. It is permitted to take donations of blood for transfusion or skin for grafting, provided this is done solely for therapeutic purposes and given voluntarily without coercion or inducement. The taking of blood or skin must be done in conditions consistent with standards and controls designed for the benefit of donor and recipient in accordance with generally accepted medical standards.
911. Right to refuse surgical operations
1. The wounded, sick and shipwrecked as well as any person detained as a PW [prisoner of war] or for any other purpose connected with the conflict is entitled to refuse any surgical operation. In such case, however, every endeavour should be made to secure from the PW a written and signed statement to this effect.
912. Acts or omissions endangering health are grave breaches
1. Any wilful act or omission which seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of any person in the power of a party, other than the one on which that person depends and which violates the above prohibitions is a grave breach. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, §§ 907 and 909–912.
In its chapter on the treatment of civilians in the hands of a party to the conflict or an occupying power and, more specifically, in a section entitled “Provisions common to the territories of the parties to the conflict and to occupied territories”, the manual states:
[The 1949 Geneva Convention IV] prohibits taking any measure, which will cause physical suffering to protected persons or will lead to their extermination. This prohibition applies not only to murder, torture, corporal punishment, mutilation or medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person, but also to any other form of brutality, whether applied by civilians or by military personnel. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1121.2.
In the same chapter, in a section entitled “Additional Protocol I”, the manual states:
1. [The 1977 Additional Protocol I] provides that all persons in the power of a party to the conflict are entitled to at least a minimum of humane treatment without adverse discrimination on grounds of race, gender, language, religion, political discrimination or similar criteria. It states in part:
2. The following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever, whether committed by civilian or by military agents:
a. violence to the life, health, or physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular:
(4) mutilation;
e. threats to commit any of the foregoing acts. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1135.1, 2.a.4 and e.
In its chapter on “War crimes, individual criminal liability and command responsibility”, the manual states:
It is a grave breach of [the 1977 Additional Protocol II] to commit a wilful act or omission that seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of any person who is in the power of a party other than the one on which that person depends. The wilful act or omission may consist of,
a. subjecting a person to a medical procedure that:
(1) is not indicated by the state of health of that person, and
(2) is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards applicable in similar circumstances to persons who are nationals of the party conducting the procedure and who are in no way deprived of liberty; or
b. subjecting a person, even with that person’s consent, to any of the following:
(1) physical mutilations,
(2) medical or scientific experiments,
(3) removal of tissue or organs for transplantation (except for donations of blood or of skin for grafting given voluntarily and in conformity with generally accepted medical standards), unless justified by the medical needs of the person. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1608.1.
In its chapter on non-international armed conflicts, the manual restates the provisions of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions:
By Common Article 3, the parties to a non-international armed conflict occurring in the territory of a party to the Conventions are obliged to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
a. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, gender, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following are at any time and in any place prohibited with regard to such persons:
i violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1708.1.
In the same chapter, the manual also states:
Although [the 1977 Additional Protocol II] contains no provisions relating to enforcement or punishment of breaches, it does contain a statement of fundamental guarantees prohibiting at any time and anywhere:
a. violence to the life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular murder as well as cruel treatment such as torture, mutilation or any form of corporal punishment;
g. threats to commit any of the foregoing. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 1713.1.a and g.
Canada
Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states:
Grave breaches of the [1949 Geneva Conventions] and [the 1977 Additional Protocol I] include any of the following actions.
a. The wilful killing, torture or inhumane treatment (including medical or scientific experimentation) of wounded and sick PW [prisoners of war], or other protected persons, or otherwise wilfully causing them great suffering or serious injury to body and health. 
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, § 103.2.a.
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): “Causing harm to life, health or physical or mental well-being, for example through … mutilation, … is prohibited.” 
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 I.
Central African Republic
The Central African Republic’s Disciplinary Regulations (2009) states: “During combat, it is also prohibited for servicemen to … commit violence to life and person … , in particular … mutilation”. 
Central African Republic, Décret 09.411 portant règlement de discipline générale dans les Armées, Ministre de la Défense Nationale, des Anciens Combattants, des Victimes de Guerre, du Désarmement et de la Restructuration de l’Armée, 10 December 2009, Article 12(11).
Chad
Chad’s Instructor’s Manual (2006) prohibits “mutilation”. 
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. 92; see also p. 70.
The manual further states: “In giving detainee patients medical treatment, it is prohibited to subject such persons to a medical act that is unrelated to their state of health and that does not comply with medical standards.” 
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. 93.
The manual also states that the conducting of “biological and medical experiments” is a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and thus a war crime. 
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. 108.
Côte d’Ivoire
Côte d’Ivoire’s Teaching Manual (2007) provides in Book III, Volume 2 (Instruction of second-year trainee officers):
I.3. War crimes
This is by far the breach which can take the most varied forms. It relates to the grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, namely the following acts directed against the persons or objects protected by these acts:
- torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments. 
Côte d’Ivoire, Droit de la guerre, Manuel d’instruction, Livre III, Tome 2: Instruction de l’élève officier d’active de 2ème année, Manuel de l’instructeur, Ministère de la Défense, Forces Armées Nationales, November 2007, p. 44.
Djibouti
Djibouti’s Disciplinary Regulations (1982) states: “It is prohibited for combatants to … commit violence to the life and person of … prisoners and civilians, including all forms of … mutilation”. 
Djibouti, Décret no. 82-028/PR/DEF du 5 mai 1982 portant règlement de la discipline générale dans les Forces armées, Article 30(3).
Djibouti
Djibouti’s Manual on International Humanitarian Law (2004) states that “mutilations … are prohibited”. 
Djibouti, Manuel sur le droit international humanitaire et les droits de l’homme applicables au travail du policier, Ministère de l’Intérieur, Direction Générale de la Police, 2004, p. 31; see also p. 37.
The manual further states that the following “are currently considered as war crimes … if committed against any person not or no longer participating in hostilities: … inhuman treatment and biological experiments”. 
Djibouti, Manuel sur le droit international humanitaire et les droits de l’homme applicables au travail du policier, Ministère de l’Intérieur, Direction Générale de la Police, 2004, p. 50; see also p. 51 (genocide).
Ecuador
Ecuador’s Naval Manual (1989) provides: “Nor may [the wounded and sick] be subjected to any medical procedure not called for by their condition or inconsistent with accepted medical standards.” 
Ecuador, Aspectos Importantes del Derecho Internacional Marítimo que Deben Tener Presente los Comandantes de los Buques, Academia de Guerra Naval, 1989, § 11.4.
France
France’s Disciplinary Regulations (1975) as amended provides that soldiers in combat are prohibited to subject the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners and civilians to mutilations. 
France, Règlement de Discipline Générale dans les Armées, Decree No. 75-675 of 28 July 1975, replacing Decree No. 66-749, completed by Decree of 11 October 1978, implemented by Instruction No. 52000/DEF/C/5 of 10 December 1979, and modified by Decree of 12 July 1982, Ministère de la Défense, Etat-Major de l’Armée de Terre, Bureau Emploi, Article 9 bis (2).
France
France’s LOAC Summary Note (1992) provides that biological experiments are war crimes under the law of armed conflicts. 
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, § 3.4.
France
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) provides that mutilation is a war crime. 
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. 45.
Germany
Germany’s Military Manual (1992) provides:
606. It is prohibited to subject wounded, sick and shipwrecked persons to any medical procedure which is not consistent with generally accepted standards. In particular, it is prohibited to carry out physical mutilation, medical or other scientific experiments or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation.
608. The wounded and sick have the right to refuse any surgical operation and similar manipulation, in which case medical personnel shall request a written statement to that effect, signed or acknowledged by the patient. Simple diagnostic measures, such as the taking of blood, shall be permitted, as shall measures necessary to prevent, combat and cure contagious diseases and epidemics. 
Germany, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, DSK VV207320067, edited by The Federal Ministry of Defence of the Federal Republic of Germany, VR II 3, August 1992, English translation of ZDv 15/2, Humanitäres Völkerrecht in bewaffneten Konflikten – Handbuch , August 1992, §§ 606 and 608.
The manual further states that conducting biological experiments is a grave breach of IHL. 
Germany, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, DSK VV207320067, edited by The Federal Ministry of Defence of the Federal Republic of Germany, VR II 3, August 1992, English translation of ZDv 15/2, Humanitäres Völkerrecht in bewaffneten Konflikten – Handbuch, August 1992, § 1209.
Greece
The Hellenic Territorial Army’s Internal Service Code (1984), as amended, provides: “It is forbidden for members of the armed forces: … To violate the life and physical integrity of sick, wounded as well as citizens by means of … mutilations.” 
Greece, Hellenic Territorial Army Regulation of Internal Service Code, Presidential Decree 130/1984 (Military Regulation 20-1), as amended, Article 15(i).
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) states: “The rationale behind the law of war is that even in the midst of the inferno, there are grave deeds that must not be committed (… medical experiments).” 
Israel, Laws of War in the Battlefield, Manual, Military Advocate General Headquarters, Military School, 1998, p. 4.
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states:
Even if it appears that in war everything is permissible and there is no differentiating between a moral and an immoral act, even in the heat of battle there are actions that are considered unacceptable (rape, the torturing of prisoners-of-war, medical experiments) and it is on these that the rules of warfare are based. Although the rules of warfare do not entirely prevent the horrors of war, they draw a line in the sand that must not be crossed, even in war. 
Israel, Rules of Warfare on the Battlefield, Military Advocate-General’s Corps Command, IDF School of Military Law, Second Edition, 2006, p. 8.
The Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) is a second edition of the Manual on the Laws of War (1998).
Italy
Italy’s IHL Manual (1991) provides that, in occupied territories, civilians shall not be subjected to “mutilations, medical or scientific experiments not indicated by their state of health”. 
Italy, Manuale di diritto umanitario, Introduzione e Volume I, Usi e convenzioni di Guerra, SMD-G-014, Stato Maggiore della Difesa, I Reparto, Ufficio Addestramento e Regolamenti, Rome, 1991, Vol. I, § 41(e).
Morocco
Morocco’s Disciplinary Regulations (1974) provides that soldiers in combat are prohibited to subject the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners and civilians to mutilations. 
Morocco, Règlement de Discipline Général dans les Forces Armées Royales, Dahir No. 1-74-383 du 15 rejeb 1394, 5 August 1974, Article 25(2).
Mexico
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009), in a section on the 1949 Geneva Convention I, states:
Members of the armed forces and other persons who are wounded or sick must be respected and protected in all circumstances and receive the medical attention required by their condition as promptly as possible. Any attempts upon their lives or violence to their persons are strictly prohibited; in particular, they must not be … subjected to … biological experiments. 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 88.
In a section on the 1949 Geneva Convention II, the manual states:
111. The Convention provides that members of the armed forces and other persons at sea who are wounded, sick or shipwrecked must be respected and protected in all circumstances …
113. Any attempts upon their lives or violence to their persons are strictly prohibited; in particular, they must not be … subjected to … biological experiments. 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, §§ 111 and 113.
In a section on the 1949 Geneva Convention III, the manual states that “prisoners of war may not be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical treatment of the prisoners concerned and carried out in their interest.” 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 160.
In a section on the 1949 Geneva Convention IV, the manual states:
No physical or moral coercion may be used against protected persons. It is prohibited for the High Contracting Parties to take any action specifically intended to cause either physical suffering or extermination of the protected persons in their hands. This prohibition applies … [to] mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person. 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 224.
In a section on the 1977 Additional Protocols, the manual states that “mutilation … [is] banned”. 
Mexico, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para el Ejército y la Fuerza Área Mexicanos, Ministry of National Defence, June 2009, § 255.
Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands restates the prohibition of mutilation contained in Article 75 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I and Article 4 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II. 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, pp. VIII-3 and XI-4.
The manual further states: “It is prohibited to subject the wounded and sick to mutilation and – even with their permission – to medical or scientific experiments.” The manual lists “unnecessary medical treatment, mutilation and medical or scientific experiments” among grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Additional Protocol I. 
Netherlands, Toepassing Humanitair Oorlogsrecht, Voorschift No. 27-412/1, Koninklijke Landmacht, Ministerie van Defensie, 1993, pp. VI-2 and IX-5.
Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states:
0605. The wounded and sick may not be physically mutilated. Even with their consent, they must not be subjected to medical or scientific experiments. They have the right to refuse any intervention or operation. Even with the donor’s consent, the removal of tissue or organs for transplantation is prohibited. Exceptions to this are for blood transfusions and skin transplants. These are permitted only under a number of stringent conditions (they must be wholly voluntary and in accordance with generally accepted medical standards). A medical register must be kept of blood transfusions and skin transplants.
0606. Care must be taken to keep medical records for all medical treatment carried out on prisoners of war, internees and persons otherwise deprived of their freedom. Such records should be available for examination by the protecting power … 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, §§ 0605–0606.
The manual further states:
0708. Fundamental guarantees
What is the right to protection of persons not deemed prisoners of war? Primarily, these are civilians who play a direct part in hostilities, but also to mercenaries … The use of violence against such persons is prohibited (no torture or mutilation …, etc.). 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0708.
The manual also states that “it is prohibited to subject [prisoners of war] to medical or scientific experiments”. 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0710.
In addition, the manual refers to mutilation as an act that is “prohibited at all times”. 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0810.
(emphasis in original)
In its chapter on non-international armed conflict, the manual states:
1051. It is expressly prohibited to carry out the following acts against the civilian population or individual civilians, wounded, sick or prisoners:
- violence or assaults on the life, health or physical or mental wellbeing of persons, especially: killing/murder, cruel treatment, mutilation, torture or corporal punishments;
- threatening anyone with the above-mentioned acts or treatment.
1053. It is also prohibited to carry out physical mutilation, medical or scientific experiments, or to subject the categories of person listed in 1029 and 1031 above to any form of medical treatment inconsistent with generally accepted medical rules and procedures applied to free persons under similar medical circumstances. 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, §§ 1051 and 1053.
New Zealand
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) provides that the sick, wounded and shipwrecked “must not be subject to any medical procedure which is not required by their state of health or which is inconsistent with accepted medical standards”. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 1003.3; see also § 1003.1 and 4.
The manual further states that the 1949 Geneva Convention IV prohibits the parties from “taking any measure of such character as to cause the physical suffering … of protected persons in their hands”, including mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, § 1321.4.
The manual considers biological experiments as a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions I and II. It adds:
[The 1977 Additional Protocol I], Art. 11, makes a number of medical practices grave breaches of the Protocol … It is a grave breach to carry out on persons detained by an adverse Party, even with their consent, physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, except where such action is justified by the medical needs of the person affected. 
New Zealand, Interim Law of Armed Conflict Manual, DM 112, New Zealand Defence Force, Headquarters, Directorate of Legal Services, Wellington, November 1992, §§ 1702.1 and 1703.2.
Nigeria
Nigeria’s Military Manual (1994) recalls the content of Article 12 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I, which “expressly prohibits [subjecting the wounded and sick] to … biological experiments”. 
Nigeria, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), Directorate of Legal Services, Nigerian Army, 1994, p. 13, § 4.
Nigeria
Nigeria’s Manual on the Laws of War provides that biological experiments on all persons protected by the 1949 Geneva Conventions are war crimes. 
Nigeria, The Laws of War, by Lt. Col. L. Ode PSC, Nigerian Army, Lagos, undated, § 6(a).
With regard to the wounded and sick, the manual adds: “It is particularly prohibited to … abandon them to scientific experiments.” 
Nigeria, The Laws of War, by Lt. Col. L. Ode PSC, Nigerian Army, Lagos, undated, § 35.
Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “Mutilation is prohibited.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 32.j.
The manual also states:
Medical personnel must refrain from any act that can be classed as a war crime against persons or property protected under international humanitarian law. These include:
(2) … biological experiments and other medical or scientific experiments;
(4) any wilful act or omission which seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of persons; donations of blood for transfusion and skin for grafting are permitted, provided that they are given voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement, and then only for purely therapeutic purposes; all such donations must be noted in medical records. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 83.f.(2) and (4); see also § 84.a and d.
The manual further states:
The following acts, among others, are prohibited and are considered war crimes:
c. any act subjecting a prisoner of war to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in their interest. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 35.c.
In situations of non-international armed conflict, the manual states that “mutilation” committed against persons taking no active part in hostilities, or placed hors de combat, is prohibited. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial Nº 1394-2004-DE/CCFFAA/CDIH-FFAA, Lima, 1 December 2004, § 71.a.(1).
Peru
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010), in a section on the “Civilian Population”, states: “Mutilation is prohibited.” 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 33(j), p. 251.
The manual further states:
The following acts, among others, are prohibited and are considered war crimes:
c. any act subjecting a prisoner of war to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in their interest. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 36(c), p. 253.
The manual also states:
[a.] Medical ethics in armed conflict are the same as in peacetime, taking into account that:
(2) experiments on human persons are prohibited. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 75(a)(2), p. 273.
With respect to medical activities, the manual further states:
It is prohibited to subject protected persons to any medical act that is not required by their state of health and to undertake medical, biological or scientific experiments on them.
A small exception is accepted with regard to two medical acts: donations of blood for transfusion and of skin for grafting if they are conducted with the full consent of the donors and for therapeutic purposes. 
Peru, Manual de Derecho Internacional Humanitario y Derechos Humanos para las Fuerzas Armadas, Resolución Ministerial No. 049-2010/DE/VPD, Lima, 21 May 2010, § 75(d), p. 274.
Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Military Manual (1990) prohibits the carrying out of medical or scientific experiments on war victims, namely the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, POWs and the civilian population. 
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, § 8(d).
Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) states:
Under any circumstances international humanitarian law ensures humane treatment during an armed conflict, of persons not directly involved in combat operations … In particular, the following shall be prohibited with regard to such persons: violence to life and person, including … mutilation … [and] threats to commit any of the above acts. 
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, § 4.
With regard to internal armed conflict, the Regulations states:
The following acts against [all persons who do not take a direct part or who have ceased to take part in hostilities] are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever: … mutilation [and] threats to commit any of the foregoing acts. 
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, § 81.
Senegal
Senegal’s Disciplinary Regulations (1990) provides that it is prohibited for soldiers in combat to mutilate the wounded, sick, shipwrecked, prisoners and civilians. 
Senegal, Règlement de Discipline dans les Forces Armées, Décret 90-1159, 12 October 1990, § 2.
Senegal
Senegal’s IHL Manual (1999) provides that one of the fundamental guarantees common to the IHL conventions and the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights is the prohibition of medical acts on persons deprived of their liberty which are not justified by the state of health of the person concerned and are not in accordance with the generally accepted and recognized medical norms. 
Senegal, Le DIH adapté au contexte des opérations de maintien de l’ordre, République du Sénégal, Ministère des Forces Armées, Haut Commandement de la Gendarmerie et Direction de la Justice Militaire, Cabinet, 1999, pp. 3 and 24.
South Africa
South Africa’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides that one type of grave breach “relates to combat activities and medical experimentation. It requires both wilfulness and that death or serious injury to body or health is caused (Article 85(3)).” 
South Africa, Presentation on the South African Approach to International Humanitarian Law, Appendix A, Chapter 4: International Humanitarian Law (The Law of Armed Conflict), National Defence Force, 1996, § 36(a).
The manual also provides that “physical experimentation and medical experiments (Article 22)” are grave breaches of the 1977 Additional Protocol I. 
South Africa, Presentation on the South African Approach to International Humanitarian Law, Appendix A, Chapter 4: International Humanitarian Law (The Law of Armed Conflict), National Defence Force, 1996, § 37(e); see also § 40.
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides: “It is not permitted to subject [POWs] to scientific experiments not justified by medical reasons or which are not in the interests of the prisoner.” 
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, § 8.4.a.(1).
The manual further states that subjecting protected persons to medical procedures not required by their state of health and carrying out medical, biological or scientific experiments, committed by medical personnel, are war crimes. It adds that in occupied territories, “medical or scientific experiments not required by health” are absolutely prohibited. 
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, § 9.2.a.(2) and (3).
The manual also provides that subjecting “prisoners, internees and any other detained person to acts which endanger their physical or mental integrity, such as mutilations, medical or scientific experiments, removal of tissues and organs and any medical procedure not indicated by their state of health and not applied in accordance with generally accepted medical standards” are grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and constitute war crimes. 
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, § 11.8.b.(1).
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states:
[N]o person who is captured or detained in relation to an armed conflict remains unprotected under the law of armed conflict and is entitled, at all times, to minimum guarantees. [These include] … prohibition of the following acts at any time and in any place, whether committed by civilian or military agents:
c. mutilation. 
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, § 8.2.c.
The manual also states that prisoners of war must not be subjected to “physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in their interest”. 
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, § 8.4.a.(1).
The manual further states that “the duties of medical personnel, as established by the law of armed conflict” include: “refrain from subjecting protected persons to any medical procedure not required by the state of health of the person concerned or conducting medical, biological or scientific experiments on them”. 
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, § 9.2.a.(2).(a).
Under the manual, “biological experiments and other medical or scientific experiments” committed by medical personnel are war crimes. 
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, § 9.2.a.(2).(b).
The manual also provides that the medical responsibilities assumed by the military authority in occupied territory include an absolute prohibition on “medical or scientific experiments not required as part of medical treatment” and “mutilations”. 
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, § 9.6.a.(1).
Sweden
Sweden’s IHL Manual (1991) provides that “biological experiments” are grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
Sweden, International Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflict, with reference to the Swedish Total Defence System, Swedish Ministry of Defence, January 1991, Section 4.2, p. 93.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) provides that “medical and scientific experiments” run counter to the obligation of humane treatment and prohibits medical and scientific experiments other than those required for medical reasons. It adds that conducting biological experiments on persons protected by the 1949 Geneva Conventions constitutes a grave breach of these instruments. 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Articles 97, 147 and 192.
Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “Serious violations of international humanitarian law directed against people include: … medical, biological or scientific experiments on human beings”. 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, § 1.8.5.
The manual further states that “mutilation”, or threats of such action, against the following persons is prohibited in non-international armed conflicts:
- persons taking no active part in the hostilities;
- members of armed forces who have laid down their arms;
- those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause. 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, § 1.4.10.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) prohibits measures that cause physical suffering, including mutilations or scientific and medical experiments on protected persons. This rule also applies in occupied territories. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, §§ 42, 282 and 549.
The manual specifies that biological experiments and “wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or to health” are grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 625(a).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Pamphlet (1981) provides that neither wounded and sick members of the opposing forces nor civilians may be subjected to biological experiments. 
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, § 2 and Section 9, p. 35, § 9.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states in its chapter relating to the wounded and sick: “Violence and biological experiments are forbidden.” 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 7.3.
The manual further states:
7.5. “The physical or mental health and integrity of persons who are in the power of an adverse Party or who are interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty” as a result of armed conflict “shall not be endangered by any unjustified act or omission.” “Any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards which would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the Party conducting the procedure and who are in no way deprived of liberty” is prohibited.
7.5.1. In dealing with medical treatment on the basis of real medical need on the part of the patient, the law repeats fundamental medical ethics. The aim is to prevent experiments or unjustified medical operations on persons who are in no position to give their free consent. This protection extends to all those in the hands of an enemy or other party and even to citizens of the detaining power who are interned for reasons related to the armed conflict. In the absence of real medical justification, all persons are protected from physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation even with their consent unless these acts are justified under the general principles outlined in paragraph 7.5.
7.5.2. The only exceptions to the express prohibitions mentioned above relate to the voluntary donation of blood for transfusions or skin for grafting. Such donations must be for “therapeutic purposes, under conditions consistent with generally accepted medical standards and controls designed for the benefit of both the donor and the recipient.” “Voluntary” means that the donor must be capable of expressing his complete agreement, without any coercion or inducement.
7.5.3. Medical records relating to all medical procedures should, if possible, be kept. These medical records must be available at all times for inspection by the protecting power.
Right to refuse consent
7.6. Persons protected under paragraph 7.5 have the right to refuse any surgical operation. In cases of refusal, medical personnel must try to obtain “a written statement to that effect, signed or acknowledged by the patient”. The right still exists to carry out surgery necessary to save life in an emergency without obtaining the consent of the patient in accordance with medical ethics and on the same basis as for the general population under domestic law. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, §§ 7.5–7.6; see also § 9.4.
[emphasis in original]
In its chapter on prisoners of war, the manual states:
8.29. In relation to prisoners of war the following acts and omissions by the detaining power are prohibited:
b. Physical mutilation or medical or scientific experiments, even with consent.
c. Any medical treatment, even with the consent of the prisoner of war, including removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, unless it is:
(1) necessitated by the health of the person concerned;
(2) consistent with generally accepted medical standards; and
(3) applied in similar circumstances to those which would apply to nationals of the detaining power.
An exception to this rule is that prisoners of war may consent to give blood for transfusion or skin for grafting provided that consent is given voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement, and then only for therapeutic purposes. Generally accepted medical standards must be applied together with controls designed for the benefit of both the donor and the recipient. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 8.29.
In its chapter on internal armed conflict, the manual restates the provisions of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions:
Under the terms of Common Article 3, the parties to a non-international armed conflict occurring in the territory of a party to the Conventions are obliged to apply “as a minimum”, the following provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 15.4.
In the same chapter, the manual prohibits
[the] “physical mutilation or … medical or scientific experiments of a kind which are neither justified by medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which causes death to or seriously endangers the health of” [any person in the hands of a party to the conflict]. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 15.30.
In its chapter on enforcement of the law of armed conflict, the manual notes:
Additional Protocol I extends the definition of grave breaches to include the following:
a. any wilful act or omission which seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of any person who is in the power of a party other than the one on which he depends and involves:
(1) subjecting that person to any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards which would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the party conducting the procedure and who are in no way deprived of liberty;
(2) carrying out on such persons, even with their consent, physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments, or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, except where these acts are justified in conformity with the conditions provided for in (1) above, or, in the case only of donations of blood for transfusion or of skin for grafting, that they are given voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement, and then only for therapeutic purposes, under conditions consistent with generally accepted medical standards and controls designed for the benefit of both the donor and the recipient. 
United Kingdom, The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, Ministry of Defence, 1 July 2004, § 16.25.
United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) restates common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
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, § 11.
The manual provides: “No prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.” 
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, § 89.
The manual also provides that wounded and sick members of the armed forces shall not be subjected to biological experiments. It further stipulates that medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person are prohibited.  
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, §§ 215 and 271.
The manual also provides that “biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health” are war crimes under the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
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, § 502.
United States of America
The US Air Force Pamphlet (1976) refers to Articles 12 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I, 12 of the 1949 Geneva Convention II and 13 of the 1949 Geneva Convention III and prohibits medical, scientific and biological experiments. 
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), 13-2 and 14-4.
United States of America
The US Instructor’s Guide (1985) provides that subjecting captured persons to medical or scientific experiments is a capital offence prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever. 
United States, Instructor’s Guide – The Law of War, Headquarters Department of the Army, Washington, April 1985, p. 8.
United States of America
The US Naval Handbook (1995) provides: “nor may [the wounded and sick] be subjected to any medical procedure not called for by their condition or inconsistent with accepted medical standards”. 
United States, The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14M/MCWP 5-2.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7, issued by the Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and Headquarters, US Marine Corps, and Department of Transportation, US Coast Guard, October 1995 (formerly NWP 9 (Rev. A)/FMFM 1-10, October 1989), § 11-4.
United States of America
The US Manual for Military Commissions (2007), Part IV, Crimes and Elements, includes in the list of crimes triable by military commissions:
MUTILATING OR MAIMING.
a. Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who intentionally injures one or more protected persons by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation of the person or persons, or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of the body of the person or persons, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose, shall be punished, if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a military commission under this chapter may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as a military commission under this chapter may direct.”
b. Elements.
(1) The accused injured one or more persons by permanently disfiguring the person or persons or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of the body of the person or persons;
(2) The accused intended to subject such person or persons to such mutilation;
(3) The person or persons was or were protected persons;
(4) The injuries were done with unlawful force and violence;
(5) The conduct caused the death or seriously damaged or endangered the physical health or mental health or physical appearance of such person or persons;
(6) The injuries did not have any legitimate medical or dental purpose; and
(7) The conduct took place in the context of and was associated with armed conflict.
c. Comment. It is mutilation or maiming to put out a person’s eye, to cut off a hand, foot, or finger, or to knock out a tooth, as these injuries destroy or disable those members or organs. It is also mutilation or maiming to injure an internal organ so as to seriously diminish the physical vigor of a person. Likewise, it is mutilation or maiming to cut off an ear or to scar a face with acid, as these injuries seriously disfigure a person. A disfigurement need not mutilate any entire member to come within the article, or be of any particular type, but must be such as to impair perceptibly and materially the victim’s comeliness. The disfigurement, diminishment of vigor, or destruction or disablement of any member or organ must be a serious injury of a substantially permanent nature. However, the offense is complete if such an injury is inflicted even though there is a possibility that the victim may eventually recover the use of the member or organ, or that the disfigurement may be cured by surgery.
d. Maximum Punishment. Death, if the death of any person occurs as a result of the mutilation or maiming. Otherwise, confinement for 20 years. 
United States, Manual for Military Commissions, published in implementation of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, 10 U.S.C. §§ 948a, et seq., 18 January 2007, Part IV, § 6(14), pp. IV-11 and IV-12.
United States of America
The US Naval Handbook (2007) states that “the following acts are prohibited with respect to detainees in DOD [Department of Defense] custody and control: … mutilation”. 
United States, The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14M/MCWP 5-12.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7, issued by the Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and Headquarters, US Marine Corps, and Department of Homeland Security, US Coast Guard, July 2007, § 11.2.
The Handbook further states: “All detainees shall … not be subjected to medical or scientific experiments.” 
United States, The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14M/MCWP 5-12.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7, issued by the Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and Headquarters, US Marine Corps, and Department of Homeland Security, US Coast Guard, July 2007, § 11.2.
The Handbook also states: “The physical or mental well-being of enemy wounded and sick personnel may not be unjustifiably endangered, nor may the wounded and sick be subjected to any medical procedure not called for by their condition or inconsistent with accepted medical standards.” 
United States, The Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14M/MCWP 5-12.1/COMDTPUB P5800.7, issued by the Department of the Navy, Office of the Chief of Naval Operations and Headquarters, US Marine Corps, and Department of Homeland Security, US Coast Guard, July 2007, § 11.6.
United States of America
The US Manual on Detainee Operations (2008) states:
As a subset of military operations, detainee operations must comply with the law of war during all armed conflicts …
… Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, as construed and applied by U.S. law, establishes minimum standards for the humane treatment of all persons detained by the United States, coalition, and allied forces. Common Article 3 prohibits at any time and in any place: “mutilation … ”. 
United States, Manual on Detainee Operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 30 May 2008, pp. I-2–I-3.
The manual further states:
DODD 2310.01E [Department of Defense Directive, The Department of Defense Detainee Program] requires that all DOD [Department of Defense] personnel and contractors will apply, without regard to a detainee’s legal status, at a minimum, the standards articulated in Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 …
Article 3 Common to the Geneva Convention of 1949
In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities … shall in all circumstances be treated humanely …
To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) … mutilation. 
United States, Manual on Detainee Operations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 30 May 2008, pp. III-11–III-12.
United States of America
The US Manual for Military Commissions (2010), Part IV, Crimes and Elements, includes in the list of crimes triable by military commissions:
MUTILATING OR MAIMING.
a. Text. “Any person subject to this chapter who intentionally injures one or more protected persons by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation of the person or persons, or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of the body of the person or persons, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose, shall be punished, if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a military commission under this chapter may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as a military commission under this chapter may direct.”
b. Elements.
(1) The accused injured one or more persons by permanently disfiguring the person or persons or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of the body of the person or persons;
(2) The accused intended to subject such person or persons to such mutilation;
(3) The person or persons was or were protected persons;
(4) The injuries were done with unlawful force and violence;
(5) The conduct caused the death or seriously damaged or endangered the physical health or mental health or physical appearance of such person or persons;
(6) The injuries did not have any legitimate medical or dental purpose; and
(7) The conduct took place in the context of and was associated with hostilities.
c. Comment. It is mutilation or maiming to put out a person’s eye, to cut off a hand, foot, or finger, or to knock out a tooth, as these injuries destroy or disable those members or organs. It is also mutilation or maiming to injure an internal organ so as to seriously diminish the physical vigor of a person. Likewise, it is mutilation or maiming to cut off an ear or to scar a face with acid, as these injuries seriously disfigure a person. A disfigurement need not mutilate any entire member to come within the article, or be of any particular type, but must be such as to impair perceptibly and materially the victim’s comeliness. The disfigurement, diminishment of vigor, or destruction or disablement of any member or organ must be a serious injury of a substantially permanent nature. However, the offense is complete if such an injury is inflicted even though there is a possibility that the victim may eventually recover the use of the member or organ, or that the disfigurement may be cured by surgery.
d. Maximum Punishment. Death, if the death of any person occurs as a result of the mutilation or maiming. Otherwise, confinement for 20 years. 
United States, Manual for Military Commissions, published in implementation of Chapter 47A of Title 10, United States Code, as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009, 10 U.S.C, §§ 948a, et seq., 27 April 2010, § 5(14), p. IV-12.
Armenia
Armenia’s Penal Code (2003) contains a list of crimes against the peace and security of mankind, including, when committed during an armed conflict, “biological experiments”, as well as any
medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of persons under the power of the enemy, … detrimental to the physical or mental health of these persons or violating generally accepted medical standards, even with the consent of these persons, inflicting physical injuries, subjecting people to medical or scientific experiments or the removal of tissue or organs for transplantation. 
Armenia, Penal Code, 2003, Article 390.1(2) and 390.5.
Australia
Australia’s Geneva Conventions Act (1957) as amended in 2002 provides: “A person who, in Australia or elsewhere, commits a grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions or of [the 1977 Additional Protocol I] is guilty of an indictable offence.” 
Australia, Geneva Conventions Act, 1957, as amended in 2002, Section 7(1).
The grave breaches provisions in this Act were removed in 2002 and incorporated into the Criminal Code Act 1995.
Australia
Australia’s Criminal Code Act (1995), as amended to 2007, states with respect to war crimes that are grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of the 1977 Additional Protocol I:
268.27 War crime – biological experiments
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to a particular biological experiment; and
(b) the experiment seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of the person or persons; and
(c) the perpetrator’s conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are protected under one or more of the Geneva Conventions or under Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions; and
(e) the perpetrator knows of, or is reckless as to, the factual circumstances that establish that the person or persons are so protected; and
(f) the perpetrator’s conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 25years.
(2) Strict liability applies to paragraph (1)(d). 
Australia, Criminal Code Act, 1995, as amended to 2007, Chapter 8, § 268.27, pp. 321–322.
The Criminal Code Act states with respect to other serious war crimes that are committed in the course of an international armed conflict:
268.47 War crimemutilation
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to mutilation, such as by permanently disfiguring, or permanently disabling or removing organs or appendages of, the person or persons; and
(b) the perpetrator’s conduct causes the death of the person or persons; and
(c) the conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of an adverse party; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
(2) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to mutilation, such as by permanently disfiguring, or permanently disabling or removing organs or appendages of, the person or persons; and
(b) the perpetrator’s conduct seriously endangers the physical or mental health, or the integrity, of the person or persons; and
(c) the conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of an adverse party; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty for a contravention of this subsection: Imprisonment for 25 years.
268.48 War crimemedical or scientific experiments
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to a medical or scientific experiment; and
(b) the experiment causes the death of the person or persons; and
(c) the perpetrator’s conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of an adverse party; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
(2) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to a medical or scientific experiment; and
(b) the experiment seriously endangers the physical or mental health, or the integrity, of the person or persons; and
(c) the perpetrator’s conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of an adverse party; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty for a contravention of this subsection: Imprisonment for 25 years. 
Australia, Criminal Code Act, 1995, as amended to 2007, Chapter 8, §§ 268.47 and 268.48 , pp. 332–333.
The Criminal Code Act also states with respect to war crimes that are serious violations of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and are committed in the course of a non-international armed conflict:
268.71 War crimemutilation
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to mutilation, such as by permanently disfiguring, or permanently disabling or removing organs or appendages of, the person or persons; and
(b) the perpetrator’s conduct causes the death of the person or persons; and
(c) the conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are not taking an active part in the hostilities; and
(e) the perpetrator knows of, or is reckless as to, the factual circumstances establishing that the person or persons are not taking an active part in the hostilities; and
(f) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an armed conflict that is not an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
(2) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to mutilation, such as by permanently disfiguring, or permanently disabling or removing organs or appendages of, the person or persons; and
(b) the perpetrator’s conduct seriously endangers the physical or mental health, or the integrity, of the person or persons; and
(c) the conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are not taking an active part in the hostilities; and
(e) the perpetrator knows of, or is reckless as to, the factual circumstances establishing that the person or persons are not taking an active part in the hostilities; and
(f) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an armed conflict that is not an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 25 years.
(3) To avoid doubt, a reference in subsection (1) or (2) to a person or persons who are not taking an active part in the hostilities includes a reference to:
(a) a person or persons who are hors de combat; or
(b) civilians, medical personnel or religious personnel who are not taking an active part in the hostilities. 
Australia, Criminal Code Act, 1995, as amended to 2007, Chapter 8, § 268.71 , p. 348
The Criminal Code Act states with respect to war crimes that are other serious violations of the laws and customs of war applicable in a non-international armed conflict:
268.92 War crimemutilation
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to mutilation, such as by permanently disfiguring, or permanently disabling or removing organs or appendages of, the person or persons; and
(b) the perpetrator’s conduct causes the death of the person or persons; and
(c) the conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of another party to the conflict; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an armed conflict that is not an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
(2) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to mutilation, such as by permanently disfiguring, or permanently disabling or removing organs or appendages of, the person or persons; and
(b) the perpetrator’s conduct seriously endangers the physical or mental health, or the integrity, of the person or persons; and
(c) the conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of another party to the conflict; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an armed conflict that is not an international armed conflict.
Penalty for a contravention of this subsection: Imprisonment for 25 years.
268.93 War crimemedical or scientific experiments
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to a medical or scientific experiment; and
(b) the experiment causes the death of the person or persons; and
(c) the perpetrator’s conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of another party to the conflict; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an armed conflict that is not an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for life.
(2) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to a medical or scientific experiment; and
(b) the experiment seriously endangers the physical or mental health, or the integrity, of the person or persons; and
(c) the perpetrator’s conduct is neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person or persons nor carried out in the interest or interests of the person or persons; and
(d) the person or persons are in the power of another party to the conflict; and
(e) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an armed conflict that is not an international armed conflict.
Penalty for a contravention of this subsection: Imprisonment for 25 years. 
Australia, Criminal Code Act, 1995, as amended to 2007, Chapter 8, §§ 268.92 and 268.93 , pp. 366–368.
The Criminal Code Act further states with respect to war crimes that are grave breaches of the 1977 Additional Protocol I:
268.95 War crimemedical procedure
A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator subjects one or more persons to a medical procedure; and
(b) the procedure seriously endangers the physical or mental health, or the integrity, of the person or persons; and
(c) the perpetrator’s conduct is not justified by the state of health of the person or persons; and
(d) the perpetrator knows that, or is reckless as to whether, the conduct is consistent with generally accepted medical standards that would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are of the same nationality as the perpetrator and are in no way deprived of liberty; and
(e) the person or persons are in the power of, or are interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty by, the country of the perpetrator as a result of an international armed conflict; and
(f) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 25 years.
268.96 War crimeremoval of blood, tissue or organs for transplantation
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator removes from one or more persons blood, tissue or organs for transplantation; and
(b) in the case of the removal of blood – the removal:
(i) is not for transfusion; or
(ii) is for transfusion without the consent of the person or persons; and
(c) in the case of the removal of skin – the removal:
(i) is not for grafting; or
(ii) is for grafting without the consent of the person or persons; and
(d) the intent of the removal is non-therapeutic; and
(e) the removal is not carried out under conditions consistent with generally accepted medical standards and controls designed for the benefit of the person or persons and of the recipient; and
(f) the person or persons are in the power of, or are interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty by, an adverse party as a result of an international armed conflict; and
(g) the conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 25 years.
(2) In subsection (1):
consent means consent given voluntarily and without any coercion or inducement. 
Australia, Criminal Code Act, 1995, as amended to 2007, Chapter 8, §§ 268.95 and 268.96 , pp. 369–370.
Australia
Australia’s ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act (2002) incorporates in the Criminal Code the war crimes defined in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “biological experiments” in international armed conflicts, as well as “mutilation” and “medical or scientific experiments” in both international and non-international armed conflicts. 
Australia, ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act, 2002, Schedule 1, §§ 268.27, 268.47, 268.48, 268.71, 268.92 and 268.93.
Furthermore, the Act incorporates in the Criminal Code, as war crimes, other grave breaches of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including any “medical procedure” which “seriously endangers a person’s physical or mental health or integrity” or which “is not justified by the state of health of the person”, and “removal of blood, tissue or organs for transplantation”. 
Australia, ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act, 2002, Schedule 1, §§ 268.95 and 268.96.
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan’s Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War (1995) provides that in international and non-international armed conflicts, medical or scientific experiments on prisoners of war are prohibited. 
Azerbaijan, Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War, 1995, Article 21(1).
Azerbaijan
Azerbaijan’s Criminal Code (1999) provides that medical, biological or other experiments and the removal of internal organs are violations of the laws and customs of war. 
Azerbaijan, Criminal Code, 1999, Article 115.2.
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).
Barbados
The Geneva Conventions Act (1980) of Barbados provides:
A person who commits a grave breach of any of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 … may be tried and punished by any court in Barbados that has jurisdiction in respect of similar offences in Barbados as if the grave breach had been committed in Barbados. 
Barbados, Geneva Conventions Act, 1980, Section 3(2).
Belarus
Belarus’s Criminal Code (1999) provides that subjecting, even with their consent, persons who have laid down their arms or who are defenceless, the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, medical and religious personnel, prisoners of war, the civilian population in an occupied territory or in the conflict zone or other persons enjoying international protection to medical, scientific or biological experiments is a violation of the laws and customs of war. 
Belarus, Criminal Code, 1999, Article 135(2).
Belgium
Belgium’s Penal Code (1867), as amended in 2003, provides:
War crimes envisaged in the 1949 [Geneva] Conventions … and in the [1977 Additional Protocols I and II] … , as well as in Article 8(2)(f) of the [1998 ICC Statute], and listed below, … constitute crimes under international law and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the present title … :
2. torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, including biological experiments;
18. the actions and omissions, not justified by law, which are likely to endanger the health and the physical or mental integrity of persons protected by international humanitarian law, in particular any medical procedure which is not justified by the state of health of such persons or not consistent with generally accepted medical standards;
19. unless justified under the conditions provided in § 18, acts which consist in carrying out on any persons protected under § 18, even with their consent, physical mutilation, medical or scientific experiments, or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, except in cases of donations of blood for transfusion or of skin for grafting, provided that such donations are voluntary, consented to and intended for therapeutic purposes. 
Belgium, Penal Code, 1867, as amended on 5 August 2003, Chapter III, Title I bis, Article 136 quater, § 1(2), (18) and (19).
The Penal Code also states:
In the case of an armed conflict as defined in … Article 3 common [to the (1949) Geneva Conventions], the grave breaches of [common] Article 3, … listed below, shall constitute crimes under international law and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the present title, when such breaches endanger, by act or omission, persons protected by these Conventions, without prejudice to criminal provisions applicable to breaches committed out of negligence:
1. violence to life and person, in particular … mutilation. 
Belgium, Penal Code, 1867, as amended on 5 August 2003, Chapter III, Title I bis, Article 136 quater, § 2(1).
Belgium
Belgium’s Law concerning the Repression of Grave Breaches of the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols (1993) as amended in 1999 provides that the following acts constitute crimes under international law:
… biological experiments, … acts and omissions not justified in the law which are likely to endanger the physical or mental health and integrity of persons protected by one of the Conventions relative to the protection of wounded, sick and shipwrecked persons, in particular any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of such persons or not consistent with generally accepted medical standards … [and] acts which consist in carrying out … physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments or the removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, except in the cases of donations of blood for transfusion or of skin for grafting, provided that such donations are voluntary, consented to and intended for therapeutic purposes. 
Belgium, Law concerning the Repression of Grave Breaches of the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, 1993, as amended in 1999, Article 1(3)(2) and (9)–(10).
Belgium
Belgium’s Law relating to the Repression of Grave Breaches of International Humanitarian Law (1993), as amended in 2003, provides:
War crimes envisaged in the 1949 [Geneva] Conventions … and in the [1977 Additional Protocols I and II] … , as well as in Article 8(2)(f) of the [1998 ICC Statute], and listed below, … constitute crimes under international law and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the present title … :
2. torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, including biological experiments;
9. the actions and omissions, not justified by law, which are likely to endanger the health and the physical or mental integrity of persons protected by international humanitarian law, in particular any medical procedure which is not justified by the state of health of such persons or not consistent with generally accepted medical standards;
10. unless justified under the conditions provided in § 18, acts which consist in carrying out on any persons protected under § 18, even with their consent, physical mutilation, medical or scientific experiments, or removal of tissue or organs for transplantation, except in cases of donations of blood for transfusion or of skin for grafting, provided that such donations are voluntary, consented to and intended for therapeutic purposes. 
Belgium, Law relating to the Repression of Grave Breaches of International Humanitarian Law, 1993, as amended on 23 April 2003, Article 1 ter, § 1(2), (9) and (10).
The Law also states:
In the case of an armed conflict as defined in … Article 3 common [to the (1949) Geneva Conventions], the grave breaches of [common] Article 3, … listed below, shall constitute crimes under international law and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the present title, when such breaches endanger, by act or omission, persons protected by these Conventions, without prejudice to criminal provisions applicable to breaches committed out of negligence:
1. violence to life and person, in particular … mutilation. 
Belgium, Law relating to the Repression of Grave Breaches of International Humanitarian Law, 1993, as amended on 23 April 2003, Article 1 ter, § 2(1).
Bosnia and Herzegovina
The Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Criminal Code (1998) provides that subjecting civilians, prisoners of war, the wounded, sick and shipwrecked to biological, medical and scientific experiments, removal of tissues and organs for transplant are war crimes. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Federation, Criminal Code, 1998, Articles 154(1), 155 and 156.
The Republika Srpska’s Criminal Code (2000) contains the same provision. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Republika Srpska, Criminal Code, 2000, Articles 433(1), 434 and 435.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Criminal Code (2003) states that, in time of war, armed conflict or occupation, ordering or committing “biological, medical or other scientific experiments, [or] taking of tissue or organs for the purpose of transplantation” against civilians, in violation of international law, constitutes a war crime. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Criminal Code, 2003, Article 173(1)(c).
The Criminal Code also contains the following war crimes provision:
Whoever, in violation of the rules of international law in time of war or armed conflict, orders or perpetrates in regard to wounded, sick, shipwrecked persons, medical personnel or clergy, any of the following acts:
a) … inhuman treatment, including therein biological, medical or other scientific experiments, taking of tissue or organs for the purpose of transplantation;
shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years or long-term imprisonment. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Criminal Code, 2003, Article 174(a); see also Article 175(a) for a similar provision with respect to prisoners of war.
The Criminal Code further states:
Whoever, in violation of the rules of international law, buys, sells, hands over to another person or mediates in the purchase, sale or handing over a child or a juvenile for the purpose of … transplantation of organs …
shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of not less than five years. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Criminal Code, 2003, Article 185(2).
The Criminal Code, as amended in 2004, further states:
Whoever, by means of use of force or threat of use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud or deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability, or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, recruits, transports, transfers, harbours or receipts a person, for the purpose of … the removal of organs …
shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of between one and ten years. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Criminal Code, 2003, as amended in 2004, Article 186(1).
Botswana
Botswana’s Geneva Conventions Act (1970) punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who, whether in or outside Botswana, commits, or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of, any such grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] conventions”. 
Botswana, Geneva Conventions Act, 1970, Section 3(1).
Bulgaria
Bulgaria’s Penal Code (1968) as amended in 1999 provides that ordering or carrying out biological experiments or torture on the wounded, sick, shipwrecked, medical personnel, prisoners of war and the civilian population is a war crime. 
Bulgaria, Penal Code, 1968, as amended in 1999, Articles 410(a), 411(a) and 412(a).
Burundi
Burundi’s Law on Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes (2003) states:
[The following are] considered as war crimes:
B. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflicts, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
j) subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons;
C. In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no direct part in hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and persons placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause:
a) violence to life and person, in particular … mutilation …
D. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
k) subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons. 
Burundi, Law on Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, 2003, Article 4(B)(j), (C)(a) and (D)(k).
Burundi
Burundi’s Penal Code (2009) states:
“War crimes” means crimes which are committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes, in particular:
1. Any of the following grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions … :
2°. Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
2. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
10°. Subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons;
3. In the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of article 3 common to the four 1949 Geneva Conventions … , namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause:
1°. Violence to life and person, in particular … mutilation …
5. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
11°. Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons.  
Burundi, Penal Code, 2009, Article 198(1)(2°), (2)(10°), (3)(1°) and (5)(11°).
Cambodia
Cambodia’s Law on the Establishment of the ECCC (2001) provides:
The Extraordinary Chambers shall have the power to bring to trial all suspects who committed or ordered the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Convention[s] of 12 August 1949 … which were committed during the period from 17 April 1975 to 6 January 1979. 
Cambodia, Law on the Establishment of the ECCC, 2001, Article 6.
Cambodia
Cambodia’s Law on the Establishment of the ECCC (2001), as amended in 2004, provides:
The Extraordinary Chambers shall have the power to bring to trial all Suspects who committed or ordered the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, such as the following acts against persons or property protected under provisions of these Conventions, and which were committed during the period 17 April 1975 to 6 January 1979:
- torture or inhumane treatment. 
Cambodia, Law on the Establishment of the ECCC, 2001, as amended in 2004, Article 6.
According to Article 50 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I, Article 51 of the 1949 Geneva Convention II, Article 130 of the 1949 Geneva Convention III and Article 147 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV, “torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments” against a person protected by the respective Geneva Convention are grave breaches.
Canada
Canada’s Geneva Conventions Act (1985) as amended in 2007 provides: “Every person who, whether within or outside Canada, commits a grave breach [of the 1949 Geneva Conventions or of the 1977 Additional Protocol I] is guilty of an indictable offence.” 
Canada, Geneva Conventions Act, 1985, as amended in 2007, Section 3(1).
Canada
Canada’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act (2000) provides that the war crimes defined in Article 8(2) of the 1998 ICC Statute are “crimes according to customary international law” and, as such, indictable offences under the Act. 
Canada, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act, 2000, Section 4(1) and (4).
Colombia
Colombia’s Penal Code (2000) provides for the punishment of anyone who, during an armed conflict, inflicts on a protected person biological experiments or subjects a protected person to any medical act which is not indicated and not in conformity with the generally recognized medical norms. 
Colombia, Penal Code, 2000, Article 141.
Congo
The Congo’s Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act (1998) defines war crimes with reference to the categories of crimes defined in Article 8 of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
Congo, Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act, 1998, Article 4.
Cook Islands
The Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols Act (2002) of the Cook Islands punishes “any person who in the Cook Islands or elsewhere commits, or aids or abets or procures the commission by another person of, a grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions or of [the 1977 Additional Protocol I]”. 
Cook Islands, Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols Act, 2002, Section 5(1).
Côte d’Ivoire
Under Côte d’Ivoire’s Penal Code (1981) as amended in 1998, organizing, ordering or carrying out, in time of war or occupation, biological experiments on the civilian population constitutes a “crime against the civilian population”. 
Côte d’Ivoire, Penal Code, 1981, as amended in 1998, Article 138(1).
Croatia
Croatia’s Criminal Code (1997) provides that it is a war crime to subject the civilian population, the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners of war, medical or religious personnel to medical, scientific and biological experiments and to removal of tissues and organs for transplantation. 
Croatia, Criminal Code, 1997, Articles 158, 159 and 160.
Cyprus
Cyprus’s Geneva Conventions Act (1966) punishes “any person who, whatever his nationality, commits in the Republic or outside the Republic, any grave breach or takes part, or assists or incites another person in the commission of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions”. 
Cyprus, Geneva Conventions Act, 1966, Section 4(1).
Cyprus
Cyprus’s Additional Protocol I Act (1979) punishes “any person who, whatever his nationality, commits in the Republic or outside the Republic any grave breach of the provisions of the Protocol, or takes part or assists or incites another person in the commission of such a breach”. 
Cyprus, Additional Protocol I Act, 1979, Section 4(1).
Democratic Republic of the Congo
The Democratic Republic of the Congo’s Military Penal Code (2002) provides:
Article 165
Crimes against humanity are grave violations of international humanitarian law committed against any civilian population before or during war.
Crimes against humanity are not necessarily linked to the state of war and can be committed not only between persons of different nationality, but even between subjects of the same State.
Article 166
The grave breaches listed hereafter, affecting, by action or omission, the persons and objects protected by the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977, constitute crimes against humanity, repressed according to the provisions of the present Code, without prejudice to more severe penal provisions provided by the ordinary Penal Code:
1. Torture or other inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
8. Acts and omissions not legally justified, likely to compromise the health and physical or mental integrity of persons protected by the Conventions relative to the protection of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, in particular any medical procedure not justified by the state of health of these persons or not consistent with the generally accepted rules of the medical profession;
9. Except when justified according to the conditions provided for in point 8, carrying out on the persons addressed in point 8, even with their consent, physical mutilations, medical or scientific experiments, or removals of tissue or organs for transplantation, unless it is a case of donations of blood for transfusion or of skin for grafting, provided that they are given voluntarily, with consent, and for therapeutic purposes;
Article 167
The offences contained in the preceding article are punished with penal servitude for life.
If those contained in points 1, 2, 5, 6, 10 to 14 of the same article lead to the death or cause grave injury to the physical integrity or health of one or several persons, the perpetrators are liable to the death penalty.
Article 168
The offences contained in points 8 and 9 of article 166 are punished by death if their consequence is either an illness appearing incurable, or the person’s permanent incapacitation for work, or the loss of the full usage of an organ, or a grave mutilation.
The same acts are punished with the death penalty if they have led to grave consequences for public health. 
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Military Penal Code, 2002, Articles 165–168.
Denmark
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (1973), as amended in 1978, provides:
Any person who uses war instruments or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or the general rules of international law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. a fine, lenient imprisonment or up to 12 years’ imprisonment]. 
Denmark, Military Criminal Code, 1973, as amended in 1978, § 25(1).
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (2005) provides:
Any person who deliberately uses war means [“krigsmiddel”] or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or international customary law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. imprisonment up to life imprisonment]. 
Denmark, Military Criminal Code, 2005, § 36(2).
Ethiopia
Ethiopia’s Penal Code (1957) provides that carrying out biological experiments is a war crime against the civilian population. 
Ethiopia, Penal Code, 1957, Article 282(a).
Ethiopia’s Criminal Code (2004) states:
Article 270.- War Crimes against the Civilian Population.
Whoever, in time of war, armed conflict or occupation organizes, orders or engages in, against the civilian population and in violation of the rules of public international law and of international humanitarian conventions:
(a) … biological experiments …
is punishable with rigorous imprisonment from five years to twenty-five years, or, in more serious cases, with life imprisonment or death. 
Ethiopia, Criminal Code, 2004, Article 270.
The Criminal Code of 2004 repealed Ethiopia’s Penal Code of 1957.
Finland
Finland’s Criminal Code (1889), as amended in 2008, provides that any person who “subjects [another] to a biological, medical or scientific experiment or in another manner causes him or her considerable suffering or a serious injury or seriously harms his or her health” shall be “sentenced for a war crime to imprisonment for at least one year or for life”. 
Finland, Criminal Code, 1889, as amended in 2008, Chapter 11, Section 5(1)(1).
(emphasis in original)
France
France’s Penal Code (1992), as amended in 2010, states in its section on war crimes common to both international and non-international armed conflicts:
Subjecting persons from another party to the conflict to mutilations and medical or scientific experiments which are neither justified for therapeutic reasons nor carried out in the interest of these persons, and which cause death or serious injury to their health or physical or mental integrity, is punishable by life imprisonment. 
France, Penal Code, 1992, as amended in 2010, Article 461-3.
Georgia
Under Georgia’s Criminal Code (1999), in international or internal armed conflicts, it is a crime to subject protected persons to medical experiments. It adds that it also constitutes a crime to subject persons under the authority of a party (in detention or deprived of liberty) to
any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards which would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the party conducting the procedure, in particular, subjecting such persons, even with their consent:
(a) to acts causing physical mutilations;
(b) carrying out medical and scientific experiments;
(c) removal of tissue or organs for transplantation. 
Georgia, Criminal Code, 1999, Articles 411(2)(b) and 412.
Germany
Germany’s Law Introducing the International Crimes Code (2002) provides for the punishment of anyone who, in connection with an international or non-international armed conflict, mutilates a person who is to be protected under international humanitarian law or who exposes a person who is to be protected under international humanitarian law to the risk of death or of serious injury to health
a) by carrying out experiments on such person and who has not consented in advance or whether the experiments concerned are neither medically necessary nor carried out in his or her interest,
b) by removing tissue or organs from such a person for transplantation purposes, save where blood or skin is taken for therapeutic purposes consistent with generally recognized medical principles and where the person has freely and expressly consented in advance, or
c) by using on such persons methods of treatment which are not medically recognized, without there being any medical necessity for doing so and without the person having freely and expressly consented in advance. 
Germany, Law Introducing the International Crimes Code, 2002, Article 1, § 8(1)(3) and (8).
India
India’s Geneva Conventions Act (1960) provides: “If any person within or without India commits or attempts to commit, or abets or procures the commission by any other person of, a grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions he shall be punished.” 
India, Geneva Conventions Act, 1960, Section 3(1).
Iraq
Iraq’s Law of the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal (2005) identifies the following as a serious violation of the laws and customs of war applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts:
Subjecting persons who are under the power of the other party in the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind that are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, causing death to such person or persons, or seriously endangering their health. 
Iraq, Law of the Supreme Iraqi Criminal Tribunal, 2005, Article 13(2)(K) and (4)(K).
Ireland
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, provides that grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of the 1977 Additional Protocol I are punishable offences. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 3(1).
In addition, under the Act, any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of common Article 3, of Article 12 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 12 of the Geneva Convention II, Article 13 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 32 of the Geneva Convention IV, and of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including violations of Article 75(2), as well as any “contravention” of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, including violations of Articles 4(2) and 5(2)(e), are also punishable offences. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).
Italy
Italy’s Wartime Military Penal Code (1941), as amended in 2002, states:
Except when the fact constitutes a more serious offence, the serviceman who, for reasons associated with the war, is guilty of torture or inhuman treatment … or other conduct prohibited by international conventions, including biological experiments or medical treatments not justified by health conditions, against war prisoners, civilians or other persons protected by international conventions, is punished with two to five years military imprisonment. 
Italy, Wartime Military Penal Code, 1941, as amended on 31 January 2002, Article 185-bis.
Jordan
Jordan’s Military Penal Code (2002) states that “biological experiments” shall be deemed war crimes when committed in the event of armed conflict. 
Jordan, Military Penal Code, 2002, Article 41(a)(2).
The Military Penal Code further characterizes the following as a war crime:
Any act or omission committed during an armed conflict that causes injury to the physical or mental health and integrity of persons who are in the power of the adverse party or who are interned, detained, or otherwise deprived of liberty. It is prohibited to subject these persons to any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted standards that would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals. 
Jordan, Military Penal Code, 2002, Article 41(a)(20).
Kenya
Kenya’s Geneva Conventions Act (1968) punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who, whether within or outside Kenya commits, or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of any grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions”. 
Kenya, Geneva Conventions Act, 1968, Section 3(1).
Lithuania
Under Lithuania’s Criminal Code (1961), as amended in 1998, carrying out biological experiments on protected persons and removal of organs or tissues for transplantation constitute war crimes. 
Lithuania, Criminal Code, 1961, as amended in 1998, Article 335.
Luxembourg
Luxembourg’s Law on the Punishment of Grave Breaches (1985) provides that carrying out biological experiments on protected persons is a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
Luxembourg, Law on the Punishment of Grave Breaches, 1985, Article 1(2).
Malawi
Malawi’s Geneva Conventions Act (1967) punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who, whether within or without Malawi commits or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of any such grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions”. 
Malawi, Geneva Conventions Act, 1967, Section 4(1).
Malaysia
Malaysia’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962) punishes “any person, whatever his citizenship or nationality, who, whether in or outside the Federation, commits, or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of any such grave breach of any of the … [1949 Geneva] conventions”. 
Malaysia, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, Section 3(1).
Mali
Under Mali’s Penal Code (2001), carrying out medical experiments is a war crime. It adds that mutilation of and carrying out any medical and scientific experiments on enemy persons which are not justified by their state of health is a war crime in international armed conflicts. 
Mali, Penal Code, 2001, Article 31(a) and (i)(10).
Mauritius
The Geneva Conventions Act (1970) of Mauritius punishes “any person who in Mauritius or elsewhere commits, or is an accomplice in the commission by another person of, a grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions”. 
Mauritius, Geneva Conventions Act, 1970, Section 3(1).
Netherlands
Under the International Crimes Act (2003) of the Netherlands, it is a crime to commit “in the case of an international armed conflict, one of the grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions”, including “biological experiments”, as well as grave breaches of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including:
any intentional act or omission which jeopardizes the health of anyone who is in the power of a party other than the party to which he or she belongs, and which:
(i) entails any medical treatment which is not necessary as a consequence of the state of health of the person concerned and is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards which would be applied under similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the party responsible for the acts and who are in no way deprived of their liberty;
(ii) entails the carrying out on the person concerned, even with his consent, of physical mutilations;
(iii) entails the carrying out on the person concerned, even with his consent, of medical or scientific experiments; or
(iv) entails removing from the person concerned, even with his consent, tissue or organs for transplantation. 
Netherlands, International Crimes Act, 2003, Article 5(1)(b) and (2)(b).
Likewise, it is a crime, whether in time of international or non-international armed conflict, to subject
persons who are in the power of an adverse party to the conflict to physical mutilation or medical or scientific experiments of any kind, which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such persons. 
Netherlands, International Crimes Act, 2003, Articles 5(3)(c) and 6(3)(c).
Furthermore, it is also a crime to commit, “in the case of an armed conflict not of an international character, a violation of Article 3 common to all of the Geneva Conventions”, including “mutilation” of persons taking no active part in the hostilities. 
Netherlands, International Crimes Act, 2003, Article 6(1)(a).
New Zealand
New Zealand’s Geneva Conventions Act (1958), as amended in 1987, provides:
Any person who in New Zealand or elsewhere commits, or aids or abets or procures the commission by another person of, a grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions or of [the 1977 Additional Protocol I] is guilty of an indictable offence. 
New Zealand, Geneva Conventions Act, 1958, as amended in 1987, Section 3(1).
New Zealand
Under New Zealand’s International Crimes and ICC Act (2000), war crimes include the crimes defined in Article 8(2)(b)(x) and (e)(xi) of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
New Zealand, International Crimes and ICC Act, 2000, Section 11(2).
Nicaragua
Nicaragua’s Military Penal Code (1996) punishes the carrying out on prisoners of war of “medical and scientific experiments not justified by their state of health and without their consent”. 
Nicaragua, Military Penal Code, 1996, Article 54.
Niger
According to Niger’s Penal Code (1961), as amended in 2003, the following acts, committed against persons protected under the 1949 Geneva Conventions or their Additional Protocols of 1977, constitute war crimes: mutilations, medical, scientific or biological experiments, removal of tissues and organs for transplantation, as well as
acts and omissions which are not legally justified and which may endanger the physical and mental integrity of persons protected by one of the conventions relative to the protection of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, including any act which is not justified by the state of health of these persons or not in conformity with generally accepted medical standards. 
Niger, Penal Code, 1961, as amended in 2003, Article 208.3(2) and (9)–(10).
Nigeria
Nigeria’s Geneva Conventions Act (1960) punishes any person who “whether in or outside the Federation, … whatever his nationality, commits, or aids, abets or procures any other person to commit any such grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions”. 
Nigeria, Geneva Conventions Act, 1960, Section 3(1).
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.
Norway
Norway’s Penal Code (1902), as amended in 2008, states:
Any person is liable to punishment for a war crime who in connection with an armed conflict … subjects a protected person to a medical or scientific experiment that is not carried out in the interest of the person concerned and that seriously endangers the life or health of such person. 
Norway, Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 2008, § 103(g).
The Penal Code also states: “A protected person is a person who does not take, or who no longer takes, active part in hostilities, or who is otherwise protected under international law.” 
Norway, Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 2008, § 103.
Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea’s Geneva Conventions Act (1976) punishes any “person who, in Papua New Guinea or elsewhere, commits a grave breach of any of the Geneva Conventions”. 
Papua New Guinea, Geneva Conventions Act, 1976, Section 7(2).
Paraguay
Paraguay’s Penal Code (1997) provides for the punishment of anyone who, in violation of the international laws of war, armed conflict or military occupation, carries out medical and scientific experiments against the civilian population, the wounded and sick or prisoners of war. 
Paraguay, Penal Code, 1997, Article 320(2).
Peru
Peru’s Code of Military and Police Justice (2006) states:
Any member of the military or police who in the context of an international or non-international armed conflict:
7. Jeopardizes the life or health of a person protected by international humanitarian law by means of any of the following acts:
a. Subjecting persons without their express and prior consent to experiments which are neither justified from a medical point of view nor carried out in the person’s interest.
b. Extracting organs or tissue except when this is done for medical purposes, in accordance with the standard principles of medicine, and if the person has granted prior and express consent.
c. Resorting to unrecognized treatment methods without a medical necessity, even when the person granted free and express consent.
In these cases, the penalty shall be imprisonment for a period of no less than six and no more than 12 years. 
Peru, Code of Military and Police Justice, 2006, Article 90(7).
This article is no longer in force. Along with certain other articles in this legislation, it was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court (en banc decision for case file No. 0012-2006-PI-TC, 8 January 2007) because it does not stipulate a crime committed in the line of duty that would fall under the jurisdiction of a military court pursuant to Article 173 of Peru’s Constitution.
Peru
Peru’s Decree on the Use of Force by the Armed Forces (2010) states:
With respect to the persons mentioned above [i.e. persons not directly participating in hostilities or who have laid down their arms as well as persons placed hors de combat by illness, wounds, detention or any other reason], the following actions are prohibited anytime and anywhere:
a. … mutilations.
f. Threats to carry out any of the aforementioned acts. 
Peru, Decree on the Use of Force by the Armed Forces, 2010, Article 8.1.a and f.
Poland
Poland’s Constitution (1997) states: “No one shall be subjected to scientific experimentation, including medical experimentation, without his voluntary consent.” 
Poland, Constitution, 1997, Article 39.
Poland
Poland’s Penal Code (1997) provides for the punishment of any person who, in violation of international law, carries out scientific experiments on persons hors de combat, protected persons and persons enjoying international protection. 
Poland, Penal Code, 1997, Article 123(2); see also Article 118(1) (causing serious harm to health as part of a genocide campaign).
Republic of Korea
The Republic of Korea’s ICC Act (2007) provides for the punishment of anyone who commits the following war crimes in both international and non-international armed conflicts: “[c]ausing a person substantial physical or mental harm or suffering, especially by … mutilating that person” and “[s]ubjecting a person who is to be protected under international humanitarian law to the risk of death or of serious injury to health by carrying out medical or scientific experiments on such a person, being a person who has not previously given his or her voluntary and express consent, or where the experiments concerned are neither justified by medical reasons nor carried out in his or her interest”. 
Republic of Korea, ICC Act, 2007, Articles 10(2)(2) and (3)(3).
Republic of Moldova
The Republic of Moldova’s Penal Code (2002) provides for the punishment of anyone who subjects the wounded, sick, prisoners, civilians, civilian medical personnel or personnel of Red Cross and other similar organizations to “medical, biological or scientific experiments not justified by their state of health”. 
Republic of Moldova, Penal Code, 2002, Article 137.
Romania
Romania’s Penal Code (1968) punishes the carrying out of medical and scientific experiments on the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, members of civil medical services, the Red Cross or similar organizations, prisoners of war, or on all persons in the hands of the adverse party, or subjecting them to mutilations or medical procedures not justified by their state of health. 
Romania, Penal Code, 1968, Article 358.
Senegal
Senegal’s Penal Code (1965), as amended in 2007, states:
[a)] Any of the following acts constitutes a war crime if it concerns members of the armed forces, the wounded, sick or shipwrecked, prisoners of war or civilians or objects protected by the provisions of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949:
2. torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments …
b) other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts [also constitute war crimes]:
9. subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons;
c) in case of an armed conflict not of an international character, serious violations of Article 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts committed against persons taking no direct part in hostilities, including members of the armed forces who have laid down their arms and persons placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention or any other cause [also constitute war crimes]:
1. … mutilation …
d) … Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in armed conflicts not of an international character, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts [also constitute war crimes]:
11. subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons. 
Senegal, Penal Code, 1965, as amended in 2007, Article 431-3(a)(2), (b)(9), (c)(1) and (d)(11).
Serbia
Serbia’s Law on Enforcement of Penal Sanctions (2005) states: “Any treatment subjecting a prisoner to any form of … experimental treatment is forbidden and punishable.” 
Serbia, Law on Enforcement of Penal Sanctions, 2005, Article 6.
Serbia
Serbia’s Criminal Code (2005) states that, in time of war, armed conflict or occupation, ordering or committing “biological, medical or other research experiments, or taking of tissue or organs for transplantation or performing other acts causing harm to health or inflicting great suffering” against the civilian population, in violation of international law, constitutes a war crime. 
Serbia, Criminal Code, 2005, Article 372(1).
The Criminal Code further states that ordering or committing “biological, medical or other research experiment, taking of tissue or body organs for transplantation” against the wounded and sick or prisoners of war, in violation of international law, constitutes a war crime. 
Serbia, Criminal Code, 2005, Articles 373(1) and 374(1).
The Criminal Code also states: “Whoever … hides or holds another person with intent to exploit such person … [by] removal of organs or body parts … shall be punished by imprisonment of [from] two to twelve years.” 
Serbia, Criminal Code, 2005, Article 388.
Seychelles
The Geneva Conventions Act (1985) of the Seychelles punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who whether in or outside Seychelles, commits, or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of, any such grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions”. 
Seychelles, Geneva Conventions Act, 1985, Section 3(1).
Sierra Leone
Sierra Leone’s Geneva Conventions Act (2012) states:
2. Grave breaches of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions and the [1977] First [Additional] Protocol.
(1) A person of whatever nationality commits an offence if that person, whether within or outside Sierra Leone[,] commits, aids, abets or procures any other person to commit a grave breach specified in –
(a) article 50 of the First Geneva Convention [on, inter alia, the grave breach of torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments];
(b) article 51 of the Second Geneva Convention [on, inter alia, the grave breach of torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments];
(c) article 130 of the Third Geneva Convention [on, inter alia, the grave breach of torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments];
(d) article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention [on, inter alia, the grave breach of torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments];
(e) paragraph 4 of article 11 … of the First Protocol [on the grave breach of any wilful act or omission which seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of any person who is in the power of a Party other than the one on which he depends and which either violates any of the prohibitions in Article 11(1) and (2) of the Protocol or fails to comply with the requirements of Article 11(3) of the Protocol]. 
Sierra Leone, Geneva Conventions Act, 2012, Section 2(1).
Singapore
Singapore’s Geneva Conventions Act (1973) punishes “any person, whatever his citizenship or nationality, who, whether in or outside Singapore, commits, aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of any such grave breach of any [1949 Geneva] Convention”. 
Singapore, Geneva Conventions Act, 1973, Section 3(1).
Slovenia
Under Slovenia’s Penal Code (1994), subjecting civilians, the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners of war and medical and religious personnel to biological, medical and other scientific experiments or removal of tissues and organs for transplantation is a war crime. 
Slovenia, Penal Code, 1994, Articles 374(1), 375 and 376.
Somalia
Somalia’s Military Criminal Code (1963) states:
A commander who causes serious harm to lawful enemy belligerents who have fallen into his power, or to the sick, wounded or shipwrecked, by not according them the treatment prescribed by law or by international agreements … shall be punished, unless the act constitutes a more serious offence, by military confinement for not less than three years. 
Somalia, Military Criminal Code, 1963, Article 382.
South Africa
South Africa’s ICC Act (2002) reproduces the war crimes listed in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “biological experiments” committed against persons protected under the 1949 Geneva Conventions in international armed conflicts, “mutilation” of “persons taking no active part in hostilities” in non-international armed conflicts as well as
subjecting persons who are in the power of an adverse party to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of such person or persons
in both international and non-international armed conflicts. 
South Africa, ICC Act, 2002, Schedule 1, Part 3, §§ (a)(ii), (b)(x), (c)(i) and (e)(xi).
Spain
Spain’s Military Criminal Code (1985) provides for the punishment of military personnel who carry out medical or scientific experiments on the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners of war or the civilian population. 
Spain, Military Criminal Code, 1985, Article 76.
Spain
Spain’s Penal Code (1995) punishes anyone who, in time of armed conflict, subjects any protected person to biological experiments or medical treatment not justified by their state of health and not recognized by medical standards. 
Spain, Penal Code, 1995, Article 609.
Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka’s Geneva Conventions Act (2006) includes the following grave breach as an indictable offence: “inhuman treatment, including biological experiments”. 
Sri Lanka, Geneva Conventions Act, 2006, Schedule I: Article 50, Schedule II: Article 51, Schedule III: Article 130, and Schedule IV: Article 147.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Military Criminal Code (1927), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, states in a chapter entitled “War crimes”:
Art. 110
Articles 112–114 apply in the context of international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation, and, if the nature of the offence does not exclude it, in the context of non-international armed conflicts.
Art. 111
1 The penalty shall be a custodial sentence of not less than five years for any person who commits, in the context of an international armed conflict, a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely one of the following acts against persons or objects protected under one of these Conventions:
c. causing great suffering or serious injury to body or physical or mental health, in particular by … biological experiments;
2 Acts covered by paragraph 1 committed in the context of a non-international armed conflict are equivalent to grave breaches of international humanitarian law if they are directed against a person or object protected by that law.
Art. 112a
1 The penalty shall be a custodial sentence of not less than three years for any person who, in the context of an armed conflict:
a. causes serious injury to the body or physical or mental health of a person protected by international humanitarian law or puts that person in grave danger by subjecting him to a medical procedure that is not justified by the state of his health and which does not comply with generally recognized medical principles. 
Switzerland, Military Criminal Code, 1927, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Articles 110, 111(1)(c) and (2) and 112a (1)(a).
[footnote in original omitted]
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Penal Code (1937), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, states under the title “War crimes”:
Art. 264b
Articles 264d–264j apply in the context of international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation, and, if the nature of the offence does not exclude it, in the context of non-international armed conflicts.
Art. 264c
1 The penalty shall be a custodial sentence of not less than five years for any person who commits, in the context of an international armed conflict, a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely one of the following acts against persons or objects protected under one of these Conventions:
c. causing great suffering or serious injury to body or physical or mental health, in particular by … biological experiments;
2 Acts covered by paragraph 1 committed in the context of a non-international armed conflict are equivalent to grave breaches of international humanitarian law if they are directed against a person or object protected by that law.
Art. 264e
1 The penalty shall be a custodial sentence of not less than three years for any person who, in the context of an armed conflict:
a. causes serious injury to the body or physical or mental health of a person protected by international humanitarian law or puts that person in grave danger by subjecting him to a medical procedure that is not justified by the state of his health and which does not comply with generally recognized medical principles. 
Switzerland, Penal Code, 1937, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Articles 264b, 264c (1)(c) and(2).
[footnote in original omitted]
Tajikistan
Tajikistan’s Criminal Code (1998) provides for the punishment of anyone carrying out, in an international or internal armed conflict, medical, scientific or biological experiments on protected persons or subjecting them to mutilations, removal of tissues and organs for transplantation or any other medical procedure not indicated by their state of health and not conforming to generally accepted medical standards. 
Tajikistan, Criminal Code, 1998, Articles 403(2)(b) and 404.
Thailand
Thailand’s Prisoners of War Act (1955) provides for the punishment of “whoever subjects a prisoner of war to medical, biological, or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical treatment of the prisoner concerned”. This prohibition also extends to persons protected by common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. 
Thailand, Prisoners of War Act, 1955, Section 12 (prisoners of war) and Section 18 (persons protected by common Article 3).
Turkey
Under Turkey’s Criminal Code (2004), subjecting a person to scientific experiments constitutes a crime against humanity when committed “systematically under a plan against a sector of a community for political, philosophical, racial or religious reasons”. 
Turkey, Criminal Code, 2004, Article 77(e).
Uganda
Uganda’s Geneva Conventions Act (1964) punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who, whether within or without Uganda commits or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of any grave breach of the [1949 Geneva] Conventions”. 
Uganda, Geneva Conventions Act, 1964, Section 1(1).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Geneva Conventions Act (1957), as amended in 1995, punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who, whether in or outside the United Kingdom, commits, or aids, abets or procures the commission by any other person of, a grave breach of any of the [1949 Geneva] conventions or of [the 1977 Additional Protocol I]”. 
United Kingdom, Geneva Conventions Act, 1957, as amended in 1995, Section 1(1).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Under the UK ICC Act (2001), it is a punishable offence to commit a war crime as defined in Article 8(2)(b)(x) and (e)(xi) of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
United Kingdom, ICC Act, 2001, Sections 50(1) and 51(1) (England and Wales) and Section 58(1) (Northern Ireland).
United States of America
Under the US War Crimes Act (1996), grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions are war crimes. 
United States, War Crimes Act, 1996, Section 2441(c).
The US War Crimes Act (1996), as amended by the US Military Commissions Act (2006), includes in its definition of war crimes any conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions:
§ 2441. War crimes
(c) Definition.— As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(3) which constitutes a grave breach of common Article 3 (as defined in subsection (d)) when committed in the context of and in association with an armed conflict not of an international character; or
(d) Common Article 3 Violations.—
(1) Prohibited conduct.— In subsection (c)(3), the term “grave breach of common Article 3” means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
(C) Performing biological experiments.—The act of a person who subjects, or conspires or attempts to subject, one or more persons within his custody or physical control to biological experiments without a legitimate medical or dental purpose and in so doing endangers the body or health of such person or persons.
(E) Mutilation or maiming.—The act of a person who intentionally injures, or conspires or attempts to injure, or injures whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation thereof or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of his body, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose.
(3) Inapplicability of certain provisions with respect to collateral damage or incident of lawful attack.—The intent specified for the conduct stated in subparagraph … (E) o[f] paragraph (1) precludes the applicability of those subparagraphs to an offense under subsection (a) by reasons of subsection (c)(3) with respect to—
(A) collateral damage; or
(B) death, damage, or injury incident to a lawful attack.
(5) Definition of grave breaches.—The definitions in this subsection are intended only to define the grave breaches of common Article 3 and not the full scope of United States obligations under that Article. 
United States, War Crimes Act, 1996, 18 United States Code Sec. 2441, as amended by Military Commissions Act, 17 October 2006, § 2441 (c)(3) and (d).
United States of America
In July 2006, the US Deputy Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum to senior military and civilian personnel in the Department of Defense (DoD) on the subject of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its application to the treatment of detainees:
The Supreme Court Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 US 557, 29 June 2006] has determined that Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 applies as a matter of law to the conflict with Al Qaeda. The Court found that the military commissions as constituted by the Department of Defense are not consistent with Common Article 3.
It is my understanding that, aside from the military commission procedures, existing DoD orders, policies, directives, execute orders, and doctrine comply with the standards of Common Article 3 … In addition, you will recall the President’s prior directive [President George W. Bush, Memorandum, Humane Treatment of Al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees, 7 February 2002] that “the United States Armed Forces shall continue to treat detainees humanely,” humane treatment being the overarching requirement of Common Article 3.
You will ensure that all DoD personnel adhere to these standards. In this regard, I request that you promptly review all relevant directives, regulations, policies, practices and procedures under your purview to ensure that they comply with the standards of Common Article 3. 
United States, Department of Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense, Gordon England, Memorandum, Application of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions to the Treatment of Detainees in the Department of Defense, 7 July 2006.
United States of America
The US Military Commissions Act (2006), passed by Congress following the Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld in 2006, amends Title 10 of the United States Code as follows:
§ 950v. Crimes triable by military commissions
“ …
“(b) OFFENSES.—The following offenses shall be triable by military commission under this chapter at any time without limitation:
“ …
“(14) MUTILATING OR MAIMING.—Any person subject to this chapter who intentionally injures one or more protected persons by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation of the person or persons, or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of the body of the person or persons, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose, shall be punished, if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a military commission under this chapter may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as a military commission under this chapter may direct. 
United States, Military Commissions Act, 2006, Public Law 109-366, Chapter 47A of Title 10 of the United States Code, 17 October 2006, p. 120 Stat. 2628, § 950v(b)(14).
The Military Commissions Act further states:
Sec. 6. Implementation of Treaty Obligations
“ …
“(b) REVISION TO WAR CRIMES OFFENSE UNDER FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 2441 of title 18, United States Code, is amended—
“ …
“(B) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
“(d) COMMON ARTICLE 3 VIOLATIONS.—
“(1) PROHIBITED CONDUCT.—In subsection (c)(3), the term “grave breach of common Article 3” means any conduct (such conduct constituting a grave breach of common Article 3 of the international conventions done at Geneva August 12, 1949), as follows:
“(C) PERFORMING BIOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTS.—The act of a person who subjects, or conspires or attempts to subject, one or more persons within his custody or physical control to biological experiments without a legitimate medical or dental purpose and in so doing endangers the body or health of such person or persons.
“ …
“(E) MUTILATION OR MAIMING.—The act of a person who intentionally injures, or conspires or attempts to injure, or injures whether intentionally or unintentionally in the course of committing any other offense under this subsection, one or more persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including those placed out of combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation thereof or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of his body, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose. 
United States, Military Commissions Act, 2006, Public Law 109-366, Chapter 47A of Title 10 of the United States Code, 17 October 2006, pp. 120 Stat. 2633 and 2634, Sec. 6(b)(1)(B)(d)(1)(C) and (E).
United States of America
In July 2007, and in accordance with section 6(a)(3) of the Military Commissions Act (2006), the US President issued an Executive Order which stated that a “Program of Detention and Interrogation Operated by the Central Intelligence Agency” complied with US obligations under common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The Executive Order stated in part:
Sec. 3. Compliance of a Central Intelligence Agency Detention and Interrogation Program with Common Article 3.
(a) Pursuant to the authority of the President under the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including the Military Commissions Act of 2006, this order interprets the meaning and application of the text of Common Article 3 with respect to certain detentions and interrogations, and shall be treated as authoritative for all purposes as a matter of United States law, including satisfaction of the international obligations of the United States. I hereby determine that Common Article 3 shall apply to a program of detention and interrogation operated by the Central Intelligence Agency as set forth in this section. The requirements set forth in this section shall be applied with respect to detainees in such program without adverse distinction as to their race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth, or wealth.
(b) I hereby determine that a program of detention and interrogation approved by the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency fully complies with the obligations of the United States under Common Article 3, provided that:
(i) the conditions of confinement and interrogation practices of the program do not include:
(B) any of the acts prohibited by section 2441(d) of title 18, United States Code, including murder, torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, mutilation or maiming, intentionally causing serious bodily injury, rape, sexual assault or abuse, taking of hostages, or performing of biological experiments;
(C) other acts of violence serious enough to be considered comparable to murder, torture, mutilation, and cruel or inhuman treatment, as defined in section 2441(d) of title 18, United States Code. 
United States, Executive Order 13440, Interpretation of the Geneva Conventions Common Article 3 as Applied to a Program of Detention and Interrogation Operated by the Central Intelligence Agency, 20 July 2007.
United States of America
In 2009, the US President issued Executive Order 13491, Ensuring Lawful Interrogations, which stated:
By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, in order to improve the effectiveness of human intelligence-gathering, to promote the safe, lawful, and humane treatment of individuals in United States custody and of United States personnel who are detained in armed conflicts, to ensure compliance with the treaty obligations of the United States, including the [1949] Geneva Conventions, and to take care that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed, I hereby order as follows:
Section 1. Revocation. Executive Order 13440 of July 20, 2007, is revoked. All executive directives, orders, and regulations inconsistent with this order, including but not limited to those issued to or by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) from September 11, 2001, to January 20, 2009, concerning detention or the interrogation of detained individuals, are revoked to the extent of their inconsistency with this order. Heads of departments and agencies shall take all necessary steps to ensure that all directives, orders, and regulations of their respective departments or agencies are consistent with this order.
Sec. 2. Definitions. As used in this order:
(f) … “mutilation” … refer[s] to, and ha[s] the same meaning as, [the] same term[] in Common Article 3 [to the 1949 Geneva Conventions].
Sec. 3. Standards and Practices for Interrogation of Individuals in the Custody or Control of the United States in Armed Conflicts.
(a) Common Article 3 Standards as a Minimum Baseline. Consistent with the requirements of the Federal torture statute, 18 U.S.C. 2340–2340A, section 1003 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, 42 U.S.C. 2000dd, the Convention Against Torture, Common Article 3, and other laws regulating the treatment and interrogation of individuals detained in any armed conflict, such persons shall … not be subjected to … mutilation, … , whenever such individuals are in the custody or under the effective control of an officer, employee, or other agent of the United States Government or detained within a facility owned, operated, or controlled by a department or agency of the United States. 
United States, Executive Order 13491, Ensuring Lawful Interrogations, 2009, Sections 1, 2(f) and 3(a).
United States of America
The US Military Commissions Act (2009) amends Chapter 47A of Title 10 of the United States Code as follows:
§ 950t. Crimes triable by military commission
“The following offenses shall be triable by military commission under this chapter at any time without limitation:
“ …
“(14) MUTILATING OR MAIMING.—Any person subject to this chapter who intentionally injures one or more protected persons by disfiguring the person or persons by any mutilation of the person or persons, or by permanently disabling any member, limb, or organ of the body of the person or persons, without any legitimate medical or dental purpose, shall be punished, if death results to one or more of the victims, by death or such other punishment as a military commission under this chapter may direct, and, if death does not result to any of the victims, by such punishment, other than death, as a military commission under this chapter may direct. 
United States, Military Commissions Act, 2009, § 950t(14).
Uruguay
Uruguay’s Law on Cooperation with the ICC (2006) states:
26.2. Persons and objects affected by the war crimes set out in the present provision are persons and objects which international law protects in international or internal armed conflict.
26.3. The following are war crimes:
2. Torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments.
18. Subjecting persons who are in the power of another party to the conflict to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person concerned nor carried out in his or her interest, and which cause death to or seriously endanger the health of this person or persons. 
Uruguay, Law on Cooperation with the ICC, 2006, Article 26.2, 26.3.2 and 26.3.18.
Vanuatu
Vanuatu’s Geneva Conventions Act (1982) provides:
Any grave breach of the Geneva Conventions that would, if committed in Vanuatu, be an offence under any provision of the Penal Code Act Cap. 135 or any other law shall be an offence under such provision of the Penal Code or any other law if committed outside Vanuatu. 
Vanuatu, Geneva Conventions Act, 1982, Section 4(1).
Yemen
Under Yemen’s Military Criminal Code (1998), subjecting prisoners of war or civilians to any scientific experiment is a war crime. 
Yemen, Military Criminal Code, 1998, Article 21(2).
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
Under the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Penal Code (1976), as amended in 2001, subjecting civilians, the wounded, sick and shipwrecked, prisoners of war and medical and religious personnel to biological, medical and other scientific experiments or removal of tissues and organs for transplantation is a war crime. 
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of, Penal Code, 1976, as amended in 2001, Articles 142–144.
Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe’s Geneva Conventions Act (1981), as amended in 1996, punishes “any person, whatever his nationality, who, whether in or outside Zimbabwe, commits any such grave breach of [any of the 1949 Geneva] Conventions or [the 1977 Additional Protocol I]”.  
Zimbabwe, Geneva Conventions Act, 1981, as amended in 1996, Section 3(1).
Canada
In 2009, in the Munyaneza case, Canada’s Superior Court of Québec found a Rwandan national who had been residing in Canada guilty of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in Rwanda in 1994. The Court stated:
3.2 Genocide
(A) Indictment
[68] The first two counts allege that the accused committed an act of genocide in two ways:
- by the intentional killing of;
- by causing serious bodily or mental harm to;
members of an identifiable group of people, the Tutsi.
(C) Serious bodily or mental harm
[88] Rape, sexual violence, mutilation and interrogation accompanied by blows or threats are recognized as acts causing serious physical harm. 
Canada, Superior Court, Criminal Division, Province of Québec, Munyaneza case, Judgement, 22 May 2009, §§ 68 and 88.
Canada
In 2013, in the Sapkota case, Canada’s Federal Court dismissed a request for review of a decision denying refugee protection to the applicant on grounds of complicity in crimes against humanity in Nepal between 1991 and 2009. While reviewing the submissions of the respondent, Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the Court stated: “The Respondent notes that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court … is endorsed in Canada as a source of customary law.” 
Canada, Federal Court, Sapkota case, Reasons for Judgment and Judgment, 15 July 2013, § 28.
Chile
In its judgement in the Videla case in 1994 concerning the abduction, torture and murder of Lumi Videla in Chile in 1974, Chile’s Appeal Court of Santiago stated that common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions obliged parties to non-international armed conflicts “to extend humanitarian treatment to persons taking no active part in the hostilities or who have placed themselves hors de combat for various reasons, and prohibits at any time and in any place … mutilation”. 
Chile, Appeal Court of Santiago (Third Criminal Chamber), Videla case, Judgement, 26 September 1994.
Colombia
Colombia’s Constitutional Court held in 1995 that the prohibitions contained in Article 4(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol II were consistent with the Constitution, since they were not only in harmony with the principles and values of the Constitution, but also practically reproduced specific constitutional provisions. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-225/95, Judgement, 18 May 1995.
Colombia
In 2005, in the Constitutional Case No. C-203/05, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
As members of the civilian population affected by internal armed conflicts, children and adolescents have the right to respect for the fundamental guarantees granted to all persons not actively participating in hostilities, as established by Article 3 common to the [1949] Geneva Conventions … In accordance with this article, in cases of non-international armed conflicts in the territory of one of the Parties, each party to the conflict shall be bound to apply certain minimum guarantees without affecting their legal status as parties to the conflict, including: (1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities shall be treated humanely in all circumstances without adverse distinction based on discriminatory criteria; (2) To this end, the following acts are prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons (including children): (a) Violence to life and person, in particular … mutilation. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-203/05, Judgement of 8 March 2005, § 5.4.2.2.
Colombia
In 2007, in the Constitutional Case No. C-291/07, the Plenary Chamber of Colombia’s Constitutional Court stated:
Taking into account … the development of customary international humanitarian law applicable in internal armed conflicts, the Constitutional Court notes that the fundamental guarantees stemming from the principle of humanity, some of which have attained ius cogens status, … [include] the prohibition of mutilations, medical or scientific experiments or any other medical procedure not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and not consistent with generally accepted medical standards – a ius cogens norm. 
Colombia, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Case No. C-291/07, Judgement of 25 April 2007, p. 112.
[footnote in original omitted]
Poland
In the Hoess case in 1947, the Supreme National Tribunal of Poland convicted individuals charged with committing “medical war crimes”, including “castration experiments, experiments intended to produce sterilization, premature termination of pregnancy and other experiments on pregnant or child-bearing women, experiments of artificial insemination, [and] experiments aimed at cancer research”. 
Poland, Supreme National Tribunal at Poznan, Hoess case, Judgement, 11–29 March 1947.
United States of America
In its judgement in the Milch case in 1947, the US Military Tribunal at Nuremberg found the accused guilty of conducting medical experiments on prisoners of war and inhabitants of occupied territories without their consent. 
United States, Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Milch case, Judgement, 17 April 1947.
United States of America
In the Brandt case (The Medical Trial) in 1947, the US Military Tribunal at Nuremberg convicted 16 persons of carrying out medical experiments on prisoners of war and civilians which amounted to cruel and inhuman treatment and which were war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Tribunal found the accused guilty of committing medical experiments which included but were not limited to:
High Altitude Experiments, Freezing Experiments, Malaria Experiments, Mustard Gas Experiments, Ravensbrueck Experiments Concerning Sulphanilamide and Other Drugs; Bone, Muscle, and Nerve Regeneration and Bone Transplantation, Sea-Water Experiments, Epidemic Jaundice, Sterilization Experiments, Typhus (Fleckfieber) and Related Experiments, Poison Experiments, Incendiary Bomb Experiments, Jewish Skeleton Collection.
The Tribunal also held:
Obviously all of these experiments involving brutalities, tortures, disabling injuries and death were performed in complete disregard of international conventions, the laws and customs of war, the general principle of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all civilized nations … Manifestly inhuman experiments under such conditions are contrary to “the principles of the laws of nations as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and from the dictates of public conscience.” 
United States, Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Brandt case (The Medical Trial), Judgement, 20 August 1947.
United States of America
In its judgement in the Schultz case in 1969, the US Court of Military Appeals identified maiming among “crimes universally recognized as properly punishable under the law of war”. 
United States, Court of Military Appeals, Schultz case, Judgement, 7 March 1969.
Azerbaijan
In 1994, in a note to foreign embassies and all international humanitarian organizations in Azerbaijan, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan denounced cases of removal of organs for transplantation by the adverse party. 
Azerbaijan, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Note 151, Baku, 26 March 1994.
Azerbaijan
In 2007, in its third periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Azerbaijan stated:
Pursuant to the provisions of article 15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the following acts are prohibited in criminal prosecutions:
“(b) Subjecting suspects to experiments or procedures which are of long duration or involve severe physical suffering or temporary health disorders, and also the application of any other comparable trials …”. 
Azerbaijan, Third periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 10 December 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/AZE/3, submitted 4 October 2007, § 126.
Canada
Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Canada stated:
The Government of Canada does not intend to be bound by the prohibitions contained in Article 11, sub-paragraph 2 (c), with respect to Canadian nationals or other persons ordinarily resident in Canada who may be interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty as a result of a situation referred to in Article 1, so long as the removal of tissue or organs for transplantation is in accordance with Canadian laws and applicable to the population generally and the operation is carried out in accordance with normal Canadian medical practices, standards or ethics. 
Canada, Reservations and statements of understanding made upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, 20 November 1990, § 1.
Canada
In 2012, in its written replies to the issues raised by the Committee against Torture with regard to Canada’s sixth periodic report, Canada stated:
The CAHWCA [Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act] criminalizes torture as an underlying offence for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed either inside or outside Canada, as provided in sections 4(3) and 6(3) of the CAHWCA. The CAHWCA also criminalizes cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment, as such conduct may constitute a crime against humanity (which includes “other inhumane acts”) or a war crime (which includes inhuman treatment or wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health, violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; committing outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment are war crimes).  
Canada, Written replies by the Government of Canada to the Committee against Torture concerning the list of issues to be taken up in connection with the sixth periodic report of Canada, 2012, § 176.
Canada
In 2012, in a statement before the UN Security Council during an open debate in connection with the agenda item “Children and Armed Conflict”, the permanent representative of Canada stated: “This year’s Secretary General’s report continues to document grave violations and abuses being committed against girls and boys – including the killing and maiming of children … These despicable actions must be stopped.” 
Canada, Statement by the permanent representative of Canada during a UN Security Council open debate in connection with the agenda item “Children and Armed Conflict”, 19 September 2012, p. 2.
Croatia
In 2007, in its second periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Croatia stated that its Constitution prescribes: “No one shall be subjected … without his or her consent, to medical or scientific experimentation”. 
Croatia, Second periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 2 December 2008, UN Doc. CCPR/C/HRV/2, submitted 28 November 2007, § 85.
Hungary
In 2004, in its second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Hungary stated that “it is particularly prohibited to perform medical or scientific experiments on humans without their consent”. 
Hungary, Second periodic report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child, 24 May 2005, UN Doc. CRC/C/70/Add.25, submitted 17 February 2004, § 221; see also §§ 226 and 522.
Ireland
Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, Ireland stated:
For the purposes of investigating any breach of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 or of the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 adopted at Geneva on 8 June 1977, Ireland reserves the right to take samples of blood, tissue, saliva or other bodily fluids for DNA comparisons from a person who is detained, interned or otherwise deprived of liberty as a result of a situation referred to in Article 1, in accordance with Irish law and normal Irish medical practice, standards and ethics. Ireland declares that nothing in Article 11 paragraph 2(c) shall prohibit the donation of tissue, bone marrow or of an organ from a person who is detained, interned or otherwise deprived of liberty as a result of a situation referred to in Article 2 to a close relative who requires a donation of tissue, bone marrow or an organ from such a person for medical reasons, so long as the removal of tissue, bone marrow or organs for transplantation is in accordance with Irish law and the operation is carried out in accordance with normal Irish medical practice, standards and ethics. 
Ireland, Declarations and reservations made upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, 19 May 1999, §§ 2–3.
Mexico
In 2009, during a debate in the UN Security Council on children and armed conflict, the permanent representative of Mexico stated: “We condemn all acts that jeopardize the integrity of children, such as … maiming”. 
Mexico, Statement by the permanent representative of Mexico before the UN Security Council, 6114th meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.6114, 29 April 2009, p. 29.
Poland
In 2004, in its fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Poland stated that “article 39 of the Constitution provides that no one shall be subject to scientific experimentation, including medical experimentation, without his voluntary consent”. 
Poland, Fifth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, UN Doc. CCPR/C/POL/2004/5, 26 January 2004, § 115.
Serbia
In 2006, in its initial report to the Committee against Torture, Serbia stated that “no one may be subjected to medical or scientific experiments”. 
Serbia, Initial report to the Committee against Torture, 8 February 2007, UN Doc. CAT/C/SRB/1, submitted 3 May 2006, as amended by CAT/C/SRB/2/Corr.1, 23 September 2008, § 186.
Serbia and Montenegro
In 2003, in its initial report to the Human Rights Committee, Serbia and Montenegro stated:
In its Article 12, the Charter of Human and Minority Rights and Civil Liberties [of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro, adopted in 2003] stipulates that everyone has the right to inviolability of physical and mental integrity and that no one may be subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It also sets forth that no one may be subjected to medical or scientific experiment without his/her consent … It is pointed out that, under the Charter, no derogation measures are applicable in any case to the right to inviolability of physical and mental integrity. 
Serbia and Montenegro, Initial report to the Human Rights Committee, UN Doc. CCPR/C/SEMO/2003/1, 24 July 2003, § 215.
Somalia
In 2011, in its report to the Human Rights Council, Somalia stated:
Somalia has not ratified AP II [1977 Additional Protocol II] and it is therefore not directly applicable to Somalia as a matter of treaty law. The Government is aware that many provisions of AP II represent customary IHL rules and therefore apply to the situation in Somalia. Such provisions include Article 4 providing guarantees to persons taking no active part in hostilities [and] Article 5 prescribing humane treatment of persons whose liberty ha[s] been restricted … due to the fact that these norms are reflected in Common Article 3 of the [1949] Geneva Conventions. 
Somalia, Report to the Human Rights Council, 11 April 2011, UN Doc. A/HRC/WG.6/11/SOM/1, § 75.
Sri Lanka
In 2008, in its initial report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child under the 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, Sri Lanka stated:
83. In accordance with resolution 1612 and Section VI, paragraph 2 of the Terms of Reference of the Working Group o[f] the [UN] Security Council on children and armed conflict, the TFMR [Task Force for Monitoring and Reporting] will focus on violations against children affected by armed conflict …
84. … [V]iolations and abuses committed against children affected by armed conflict including … maiming of children … will also be addressed. 
Sri Lanka, Initial report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child under the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, 15 February 2010, UN Doc. CRC/C/OPAC/LKA/1, submitted 16 June 2008, §§ 83–84.
Sudan
In 2006, in its third periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Sudan stated: “Sudan has never throughout its history carried out scientific experiments on human beings.” 
Sudan, Third periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 10 January 2007, UN Doc. CCPR/C/SDN/3, submitted 29 June 2006, § 203.
Switzerland
In 2005, in a report in response to a parliamentary postulate on private security and military companies, Switzerland’s Federal Council stated:
International humanitarian law is aimed not only at states. It also contains numerous provisions for individuals and even civilians to observe. Perhaps the most well known example is Article 3 common to all four Geneva Conventions, according to which persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed “hors de combat” by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated human[e]ly, without violence to life and person, in particular mutilation, torture and cruel treatment. 
Switzerland, Report by the Swiss Federal Council on Private Security and Military Companies, 2 December 2005, Section 5.3.2, p. 46.
[footnote in original omitted; emphasis in original]
Switzerland
In 2010, in its Report on IHL and Current Armed Conflicts, Switzerland’s Federal Council stated:
3.4 [Increasing use] of anti-guerrilla tactics
Apart from the direct fight against insurgents, international humanitarian law also addresses other anti-guerrilla tactics. … If members of militias or opposition groups fall into the hands of the government they benefit from the protection of art. 75 of [the 1977] Additional Protocol I as well as that of art. 3 common to the [1949] Geneva Conventions. 
Switzerland, Federal Council, Report on IHL and Current Armed Conflicts, 17 September 2010, Section 3.4, p. 15.
[footnotes in original omitted]
Switzerland
In 2012, in a statement before the UN Security Council during a debate on children and armed conflict, the permanent representative of Switzerland stated:
[T]he situation of children affected by armed conflict remains alarming on a global scale. Children continue to be … maimed …
Pressure must be increased on persistent perpetrators. To that end, a close cooperation between the Security Council and national and international courts seeking to end impunity for serious violations of international humanitarian law is vital. 
Switzerland, Statement by the permanent representative of Switzerland before the UN Security Council during a debate on children and armed conflict, 19 September 2012.
Ukraine
In 1999, in its sixth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Ukraine stated:
72. In article 64, paragraph 2, the Constitution lists those rights and freedoms which may not be restricted under martial law or a state of emergency.
73. These rights and freedoms include, among others, the following:
- … No person shall be subjected to medical, scientific or other experiments without his or her free consent. 
Ukraine, Sixth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 11 April 2006, UN Doc. CCPR/C/UKR/6, submitted 3 November 1999, §§ 72–73.
Uganda
In 2003, in its initial report to the Human Rights Committee, Uganda stated:
Medical and scientific experimentation
151. Uganda does not have legislation in respect of torture related to scientific and medical experimentation without the free consent of the persons concerned. However, government policy dictates that consent must be obtained from a person being subjected to medical or scientific experimentation.
152. For instance, in 1999 the Government of Uganda refused the experimentation of HIV vaccines on persons until their consent had been obtained. Government insisted that experiments were to be carried out on a voluntary basis. Government also refused the use of experiments on vulnerable persons incapable of giving valid consent, such as the mentally sick, convicts and children. 
Uganda, Initial report to the Human Rights Committee, 14 February 2003, UN Doc. CCPR/C/UGA/2003/1, 25 February 2003, §§ 151–152.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Government Strategy on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict (2010) states: “IHL requires parties to a conflict to respect and protect civilians. … [C]ivilians must not be … subjected to acts of violence such as … maiming”. 
United Kingdom, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Government Strategy on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, March 2010, p. 4.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 2010, in its closing submissions to the public inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the death of Baha Mousa and the treatment of those detained with him by UK armed forces in Iraq in 2003, the UK Ministry of Defence stated regarding common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions: “On its face this protection is restricted to armed conflicts not of an international character. However, it is understood to apply in all forms of armed conflict as part of customary international law to set out the irreducible minimum standard.” 
United Kingdom, Ministry of Defence, Closing Submissions to the Baha Mousa Public Inquiry on Modules 1–3, 25 June 2010, § 10.2, p. 10.
United States of America
In 1987, the Deputy Legal Adviser of the US Department of State affirmed:
We support the principle reflected in article 11 [of the 1977 Additional Protocol I] that the physical or mental health and integrity of persons under the control of a party to the conflict not be endangered by any unjustified act or omission and not be subjected to any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards. 
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. 423.
United States of America
In 1992, in reports submitted pursuant to paragraph 5 of UN Security Council Resolution 771 (1992) on grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV committed in the former Yugoslavia, the United States described acts of mutilation perpetrated by the parties to the conflict. 
United States, Former Yugoslavia: Grave Breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention (Third Submission), annexed to Letter dated 5 November 1992 to the UN Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/24791, 10 November 1992, pp. 8 and 13; Former Yugoslavia: Grave Breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention (Fourth Submission), annexed to Letter dated 7 December 1992 to the UN Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/24918, 8 December 1992, p. 12.
United States of America
According to the Report on US Practice, “Articles 4, 5 and 6 [of the 1977 Additional Protocol II] reflect general US policy on treatment of persons in the power of an adverse party in armed conflicts governed by common Article 3” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The report also notes: “It is the opinio juris of the US that persons detained in connection with an internal armed conflict are entitled to humane treatment as specified in Articles 4, 5 and 6 [of the 1977 Additional Protocol II].” 
Report on US Practice, 1997, Chapter 5.3.
United States of America
In a concurrent resolution adopted in 2000, the US Congress expressed its sense concerning the war crimes committed by the Japanese military during the Second World War, in particular experiments conducted on living prisoners of war. The resolution asked the Government of Japan to apologise for these crimes and pay immediate reparations to the victims. 
United States, House of Representatives (Senate concurring), Concurrent Resolution, H.CON. RES. 357, 106th Congress, 2nd Session, 19 June 2000.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 2003 on the situation of human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the UN Commission on Human Rights:
Noting that the Democratic Republic of the Congo is a party to several international and regional human rights instruments and to several instruments pertaining to international humanitarian law,
2. Expresses its concern at:
(c) The reports of the perpetration in Mambasa region by forces of the Movement for the Liberation of the Congo (MLC) and the Congolese Rally for Democracy-National (RCD-N) of acts of mutilation and cannibalism. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 2003/15, 17 April 2003, preamble and § 2(c), adopted without a vote.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 2003 on human rights and bioethics, the UN Commission on Human Rights recalled “article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 2003/69, 25 April 2003, preamble, adopted without a vote.
No data.
No data.
International Court of Justice
In its judgement in the Nicaragua case (Merits) in 1986, the ICJ held that the rules contained in common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions reflected what the Court in 1949 in the Corfu Channel case (Merits) had called “elementary considerations of humanity”. 
ICJ, Nicaragua case (Merits), Judgement, 27 June 1986, § 218.
International Criminal Court
In its decision on the confirmation of charges in the Mbarushimana case in 2011, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I stated:
In relation to the Prosecution’s allegations based on the account of witness 694, the Chamber stresses, at the outset, that the acts allegedly inflicted on the body of Witness 694 [REDACTED] after she was killed cannot amount to the war crime of mutilation which presupposes an act committed against a person and not a dead body. This conduct will, therefore, not be analysed under the charge of mutilation. 
ICC, Mbarushimana case, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 16 December 2011, § 154.
The charges against Mr Mbarushimana related to alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Pre-Trial Chamber did not confirm the charges. 
ICC, Mbarushimana case, Decision on the Confirmation of Charges, 16 December 2011, § 340.
In its judgment of 30 May 2012, the ICC Appeals Chamber confirmed that decision and dismissed the appeal. 
ICC, Mbarushimana case, Judgment on Appeal, 30 May 2012.
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda
In the Semanza case before the ICTR in 1999, the accused, Laurent Semanza, who was a member of the Central Committee of the Mouvement républicain national pour le développement et la démocratie (MRND), a Rwandan political party, was charged with committing various crimes against Tutsi civilians in the Bicumbi and Gikoro communes, Rwanda, between 1 April and 31 July 1994. These crimes included violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being – including mutilations (two counts) – as a serious violation of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, punishable under Article 4(a) of the 1994 ICTR Statute. 
ICTR, Semanza case, Third Amended Indictment, 12 October 1999, § 3.19.
In its judgement in 2003, the Trial Chamber found the accused not guilty of crimes related to serious violations of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, but guilty of complicity to commit genocide, as well as various crimes against humanity, including rape, torture, murder and extermination. He was sentenced to a total of 24 years and 6 months of imprisonment. 
ICTR, Semanza case, Judgement, 15 May 2003, §§ 553 and 590.
In its judgement in 2005, the Appeals Chamber found that, in respect of the war crimes charges involving violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being, the Trial Chamber had misapplied the law on cumulative convictions. It reversed the acquittals and entered convictions for serious violations of common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and of the 1977 Additional Protocol II in respect of Count 7 (for ordering murder and aiding and abetting murder) and in respect of Count 13 (for instigating rape and torture, for murder and for committing torture and intentional murder). The Appeals Chamber also found that the Trial Chamber had erred in its finding that the accused did not have the necessary authority to render him liable for ordering the attacks that had resulted in charges of genocide and extermination in respect of the massacre at Musha Church. It therefore entered a conviction for ordering genocide and for ordering extermination in relation to that massacre. 
ICTR, Semanza case, Judgement on Appeal, 20 May 2005, § 364 and IV. Disposition.
The accused’s sentence was subsequently increased to 34 years and 6 months of imprisonment (which incorporated a six-month reduction in sentence ordered by the Trial Chamber for violations of the accused’s fundamental pre-trial rights). 
ICTR, Semanza case, Judgement on Appeal, 20 May 2005, IV. Disposition.
Special Court for Sierra Leone
In the Koroma case before the SCSL in 2003, the accused, the leader of the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC), a senior leader of the AFRC/Revolutionary United Front (RUF), a senior member of the Junta regime, and exercising the powers of the president of the Republic of Sierra Leone from May 1997 to February 1998, was, inter alia, charged with:
Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular mutilation, a VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 COMMON TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS AND OF ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL II, punishable under Article 3.a. of the [2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone]. 
SCSL, Koroma case, Indictment, 7 March 2003, §§ 44–46, Count 9.
[emphasis in original]
In addition or in the alternative, the accused was charged with “other inhumane acts” as a crime against humanity, punishable under Article 2(i) of the 2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. 
SCSL, Koroma case, Indictment, 7 March 2003, §§ 44–46, Count 10.
It was alleged that: “Widespread physical violence, including mutilations, was committed against civilians. Victims were often brought to a central location where mutilations were carried out.” The alleged mutilations included cutting off limbs and carving “AFRC” and “RUF” on the victims’ bodies. 
SCSL, Koroma case, Indictment, 7 March 2003, §§ 44–46.
Special Court for Sierra Leone
In the Brima case before the SCSL in 2005, the three accused, all former non-commissioned officers in the Sierra Leone Army who became senior members of the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) which seized power from the elected government of the Republic of Sierra Leone in May 1997, were charged, inter alia, with:
Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular mutilation, a VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 COMMON TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS AND OF ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL II, punishable under Article 3.a. of the [2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone]. 
SCSL, Brima case, Further Amended Consolidated Indictment, 18 February 2005, § 64, Count 10.
[emphasis in original]
In addition or in the alternative, the accused were charged with “other inhumane acts” as a crime against humanity, punishable under Article 2(i) of the 2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. 
SCSL, Brima case, Further Amended Consolidated Indictment, 18 February 2005, § 64, Count 11.
It was alleged that: “Widespread physical violence, including mutilations, was committed against civilians [between May 1997 and November 1998]. Victims were often brought to a central location where mutilations were carried out.” The alleged mutilations included cutting off limbs and carving “AFRC” or “RUF [Revolutionary United Front]” on the victims’ bodies. 
SCSL, Brima case, Further Amended Consolidated Indictment, 18 February 2005, §§ 58 and 59–61.
In its judgement, the Trial Chamber considered the elements of the crime of “mutilation”:
724. Regarding the specific act of mutilation, in addition to the chapeau requirements of Violations of Article 3 Common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II pursuant to Article 3 of the [2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone], the Trial Chamber adopts the following elements of the crime of “mutilation”:
1. The perpetrator intentionally subjected the victim to mutilation, in particular by permanently disfiguring the victim, or by permanently disabling or removing an organ or appendage of the victim;
3. The perpetrator’s conduct was neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the victim, nor carried out in the victim’s interest. [see Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court arts. 7(1)(f), 8(2)(c)(i)-2.]
725. The Trial Chamber notes that in its “Rule 98 Decision” an additional element was given requiring that “the perpetrator’s conduct caused death or seriously endangered the physical or mental health of the victim”. The Prosecution submits that this additional element is superfluous and should not [be] retained. The Trial Chamber agrees that such a requirement is superfluous and will not retain it. 
SCSL, Brima case, Judgement, 20 June 2007, §§ 724–725.
Subsequently, each of the three accused was found guilty, inter alia, of committing acts of “violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons”. 
SCSL, Brima case, Judgement, 20 June 2007, XIII. Disposition, §§ 2113–2123.
Brima and Kanu were each sentenced to 50 years’ imprisonment; Kamara was sentenced to 45 years’ imprisonment. 
SCSL, Brima case, Sentencing Judgement, 19 July 2007, VI. Disposition.
Special Court for Sierra Leone
In the Sesay case before the SCSL in 2006, the accused Sesay and Kallon, senior commanders in the Revolutionary United Front (RUF), Junta and Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC)/RUF forces, and the accused Gbao, senior commander in the RUF and AFRC/RUF forces, were charged, inter alia, with:
Violence to life, health and physical or mental well-being of persons, in particular mutilation, a VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 COMMON TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS AND OF ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL II, punishable under Article 3.a. of the [2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone]. 
SCSL, Sesay case, Corrected Amended Consolidated Indictment, 2 August 2006, §§ 61–67, Count 10.
[emphasis in original]
In addition or in the alternative, the accused were charged with “other inhumane acts” as a crime against humanity, punishable under Article 2(i) of the 2002 Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. 
SCSL, Sesay case, Corrected Amended Consolidated Indictment, 2 August 2006, §§ 61–67, Count 11.
It was alleged that: “Widespread physical violence, including mutilations, was committed against civilians. Victims were often brought to a central location where mutilations were carried out.” The alleged mutilations included cutting off limbs and carving “AFRC” or “RUF” on the victims’ bodies. 
SCSL, Sesay case, Corrected Amended Consolidated Indictment, 2 August 2006, §§ 61 and 62–67.
In its judgement in the case in 2009, the Trial Chamber set out the elements of the offence of mutilation, stating:
179. The Chamber observes that the Ad Hoc Tribunals have repeatedly held that acts of mutilation can be prosecuted as falling under the category of inhumane acts as they cause serious mental or physical suffering or injury and/or constitute a serious attack on human dignity. Further, the ICTR has recognised that mutilation, which can be irreparable, is a particularly serious form of physical harm. Given that mutilation is a particularly egregious form of prohibited violence, this Chamber is satisfied that the prohibition against mutilation exists at customary international law and entails individual criminal responsibility.
180. The Chamber considers that the offence contains the following elements:
(i) The Accused subjected one or more persons to mutilation, in particular by permanently disfiguring the person or persons, or by permanently disabling or removing an organ or appendage;
(ii) The conduct was neither justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the person(s) concerned nor carried out in their interests; and
(iii) The Accused intended to subject the person or persons to mutilation or acted in the reasonable knowledge that this was likely to occur.
181. While Common Article 3 [of the 1949 Geneva Conventions] and Article 4(2) of [the 1977] Additional Protocol II do not specifically provide for an exception for medically justified procedures, the Chamber finds that this exception should be logically inferred. As a result, this second element must be proven in order to establish that the offence of mutilation has occurred.
182. Furthermore, the Prosecution is not required to establish that the mutilation seriously endangers the physical or mental health or integrity of the victim. 
SCSL, Sesay case, Judgment, 2 March 2009, §§ 179–182.
[footnotes in original omitted]
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
In 1992, in its General Comment on Article 7 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Human Rights Committee held:
Article 7 expressly prohibits medical or scientific experimentation without the free consent of the person concerned. The Committee notes that the reports of States parties generally contain little information on this point. More attention should be given to the need and means to ensure observance of this provision. The Committee also observes that special protection in regard to such experiments is necessary in the case of persons not capable of giving valid consent, and in particular those under any form of detention or imprisonment. Such persons should not be subjected to any medical or scientific experimentation that may be detrimental to their health. 
Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 20 (Article 7 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights), 10 March 1992, § 7.
Human Rights Committee
In its concluding observations on the combined second and third periodic reports of the United States in 2006, the Human Rights Committee stated:
The State party should ensure that it meets its obligation under article 7 of the [1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights] not to subject anyone without his/her free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. The Committee recalls in this regard the non-derogable character of this obligation under article 4 of the Covenant. When there is doubt as to the ability of a person or a category of persons to give such consent, e.g. prisoners, the only experimental treatment compatible with article 7 would be treatment chosen as the most appropriate to meet the medical needs of the individual. 
Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the combined second and third periodic reports of the United States of America, UN Doc. CCPR/C/USA/CO/3/Rev.1, 18 December 2006, § 31.
[emphasis in original]
European Court of Human Rights
In 1992, in Herczegfalvy v. Austria, the European Court of Human Rights stated:
83. In this case it is above all the length of time during which the handcuffs and security bed were used … which appears worrying. However, the evidence before the Court is not sufficient to disprove the Government’s argument that, according to the psychiatric principles generally accepted at the time, medical necessity justified the treatment in issue [i.e. treatment with antibiotics and neuroleptics] …
84. No violation of Article 3 (art. 3) [of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights] has thus been shown. 
European Court of Human Rights, Herczegfalvy v. Austria, Judgement (Merits and just satisfaction), 24 September 1992, §§ 83–84.
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “Mutilation is prohibited, unless indicated by the state of health of the individual or medical ethics (e.g. removal of tissue or organs for transplantation).” 
Frédéric de Mulinen, Handbook on the Law of War for Armed Forces, ICRC, Geneva, 1987, § 194.
ICRC
In 1997, in a working paper on war crimes submitted to the Preparatory Committee for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, the ICRC proposed that the following crimes, when committed in an international armed conflict, be subject to the jurisdiction of the Court:
biological experiments … subjecting persons who are in the power of the adverse Party or who are interned, detained or otherwise deprived of liberty, to any medical procedure which is not indicated by the state of health of the person concerned and which is not consistent with generally accepted medical standards which would be applied in similar medical circumstances to persons who are nationals of the Party conducting the procedure and who are in no way deprived of liberty, in particular to carry out on such persons, even with their consent:
a) physical mutilations;
b) medical or scientific experiments;
c) removal of tissue or organs for transplantation. 
ICRC, Working paper on war crimes submitted to the Preparatory Committee for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, New York, 14 February 1997, § 1(a)(ii) and (d).
In addition, the ICRC proposed that the crime of “mutilation”, when committed in a non-international armed conflict, be subject to the jurisdiction of the Court. 
ICRC, Working paper on war crimes submitted to the Preparatory Committee for the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, New York, 14 February 1997, § 3(i).
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards
The Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights of Åbo Akademi University in Turku/Åbo, Finland in 1990, states that “mutilation” shall remain prohibited. 
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 3(2)(a), IRRC, No. 282, 1991, p. 331.