Practice Relating to Rule 15. The Principle of Precautions in Attack
Section C. Feasibility of precautions in attack
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands states:
The extent to which commanders and their staff can be held accountable for compliance with these rules [on precautions in attack] is determined by three factors: freedom of choice of means and methods, availability of information [and] available time. The higher the level [of command] the stricter the required compliance is.
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands provides:
The extent to which commanding officers and their staffs, if any, may be bound by these rules [on precautions in attack] depends on three specific factors:
- freedom of choice of means and methods;
- availability of intelligence;
- available time.
The higher the level [of command], the stricter the requirement for the application of the rules.
At the CDDH, the Netherlands stated:
The word “feasible” when used in Protocol I, for example in Articles 50 and 51 [57 and 58], should in any particular case be interpreted as referring to that which was practicable or practically possible, taking into account all circumstances at the time.
Upon ratification of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, the Netherlands declared: “The word ‘feasible’ is to be understood as practicable or practically possible taking into account all circumstances ruling at the time, including humanitarian and military considerations.”