In its written statement submitted to the ICJ in the Nuclear Weapons case in 1995, Mexico stated: “In accordance with international humanitarian law, indiscriminate attacks are those that can reach both military targets and civilians.” 

At the CDDH, Mexico stated: “The protection of the civilian population and civilian objects must be universally recognized, even at the cost of restricting the use of means and methods of warfare, the effects of which cannot be confined to specific military targets.” Mexico believed Articles 46 and 47 of the draft Additional Protocol I (now Articles 51 and 52) to be so essential that they “cannot be the subject of any reservations whatsoever since these would be inconsistent with the aim and purpose of Protocol I and undermine its basis”. 

In its written statement submitted to the ICJ in the Nuclear Weapons case in 1995, Mexico stated: “In accordance with international humanitarian law, indiscriminate attacks are those that can reach both military targets and civilians.” 

At the CDDH, Mexico stated: “The protection of the civilian population and civilian objects must be universally recognized, even at the cost of restricting the use of means and methods of warfare, the effects of which cannot be confined to specific military targets.” Mexico believed Article 51 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to be so essential that it “cannot be the subject of any reservations whatsoever since these would be inconsistent with the aim and purpose of Protocol I and undermine its basis”. 

In its written statement submitted to the ICJ in the Nuclear Weapons case in 1995, Mexico stated: “In accordance with international humanitarian law, indiscriminate attacks are those that can reach both military targets and civilians.”