Norma relacionada
Canada
Practice Relating to Rule 77. Expanding Bullets
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) states that “bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope that not entirely covers the core or is pierced with incisions (i.e., hollow point or ‘dum-dum’ bullets),” are prohibited.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 5-2, § 12(b).
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides: “The alteration of ammunition so that it expands or flattens easily when striking the human body is expressly prohibited.”
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 3, § 4.
The Code of Conduct also provides that the use of “bullets designed to expand or flatten easily on contact with the human body (i.e., dum-dum bullets or hollow point bullets)” is forbidden.
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 3, § 10(a).
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter entitled “Restrictions on the use of weapons” that “bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope that does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions (that is, hollow point or ‘dum-dum’ bullets)” are prohibited.
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 510.1.b.
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) states:
4. The alternation [sic] of weapons or ammunition to increase suffering is unlawful and may interfere with the overall military mission. The alteration of ammunition so that it expands or flattens easily when striking the human body is expressly prohibited.
…
10. Use of the following weapons and ammunition is forbidden:
a. bullets designed to expand or flatten easily on contact with the human body (i.e., dum-dum bullets or hollow point bullets).
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 2005, Rule 3, §§ 4 and 10(a).
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).
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.
At the CDDH, Canada voted against the Philippine amendment (see infra) because “the particular weapons are forbidden by international law and their use, other than by way of reprisal, already constitutes a war crime”.
Canada, Statement at the CDDH, Official Records, Vol. VI, CDDH/SR.44, 30 May 1977, p. 298.
