Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets
The 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets states:
The Contracting Parties agree to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xix) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[e]mploying bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.
ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(e)(xv) of the 1998 ICC Statute, as amended in 2010, “[e]mploying bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions” constitutes a war crime also in non-international armed conflicts.
Oxford Manual of Naval War
Article 16(2) of the 1913 Oxford Manual of Naval War provides:
[I]t is forbidden … to employ arms, projectiles, or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering. Entering especially into this category are … bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not cover the core entirely or is pierced with incisions.
Report of the Commission on Responsibility
Based on several documents supplying evidence of outrages committed during the First World War, the 1919 Report of the Commission on Responsibility lists violations of the laws and customs of war which should be subject to criminal prosecution, including the “use of … expanding bullets”.
UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin
Section 6.2 of the 1999 UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin provides: “The United Nations force shall respect the rules prohibiting or restricting the use of certain weapons … These include, in particular, the prohibition on the use of … bullets which … expand or flatten easily in the human body.”
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)(xix), “[e]mploying bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions”, constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts.
Australia
Australia’s Commanders’ Guide (1994) states: “Use of the following types of weapons is prohibited: … (c) bullets with a hard envelope which do not entirely cover the core or are pierced with incisions (dum-dum bullets).”
The Guide also states: “Hollow point weapons are prohibited because they cause gaping wounds which lead to unnecessary suffering.”
The Guide states that these weapons are included in those that are “totally prohibited”. It adds:
These blanket prohibitions, which may be traced to treaty or customary international law are justified on the grounds that the subject weapons are either indiscriminate in their effect or cause unnecessary suffering.
The Guide further states: “The following examples constitute grave breaches or serious war crimes likely to warrant institution of criminal proceedings: … using certain unlawful weapons and ammunition such as … expanding rounds.”
Australia
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides:
Weapons such as irregularly shaped bullets, projectiles filled with broken glass, bullets which have been scored, have had their ends filed, have been altered or which have been smeared with any substance likely to exacerbate a trauma injury are prohibited. “Dum dum” bullets (those with a hard envelope that does not entirely cover the core or which have been pierced with incisions or which have had their points filed off) come within this category of weapon.
The manual further states: “The following examples constitute grave breaches or serious war crimes likely to warrant institution of criminal proceedings: … using certain unlawful weapons and ammunition such as … expanding rounds.”
Australia
Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
Weapons such as irregularly shaped bullets, projectiles filled with broken glass, bullets which have been scored, have had their ends filed, have been altered or which have been smeared with any substance likely to exacerbate a trauma injury are prohibited. “Dum dum.” bullets (those with a hard envelope that does not entirely cover the core or which have been pierced with incisions or which have had their points filed off) come within this category of weapon.
The LOAC Manual (2006) replaces both the Defence Force Manual (1994) and the Commanders’ Guide (1994).
Burundi
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states that “bullets which expand or flatten in the human body” are “prohibited weapons”.
Belgium
Belgium’s Law of War Manual (1983) states, with a reference to the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets: “The use of dum-dum bullets, i.e. bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, is banned.”
Cameroon
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (1992) states:
These [small calibre] weapons are those which shoot bullets at very high initial speed and which cause excessive trauma comparable to that produced by dum-dum bullets
…
These bullets, unlike traditional bullets, spread or flatten out after entering the body to create a wound larger than their own diameter, thus causing excessive injury.
Canada
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
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.”
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
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
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).
Chad
Chad’s Instructor’s Manual (2006) prohibits the use of “dum-dum bullets”.
Côte d’Ivoire
Côte d’Ivoire’s Teaching Manual (2007) provides in Book IV (Instruction of heads of division and company commanders):
II.1.2. Prohibited munitions
The following types of munitions are prohibited:
…
- bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions (i.e. hollow-point bullets or dum-dum bullets).
Dominican Republic
The Dominican Republic’s Military Manual (1980) strictly prohibits the use of dum-dum bullets.
Ecuador
Ecuador’s Naval Manual (1989) states:
Weapons which cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering are prohibited because the degree of pain, the severity of the injuries and the certainty of death they entail are clearly out of all proportion with the military advantage to be gained by their use … [D]um-dum bullets belong in this category since the small military advantage that may be derived from their use guarantees death due to … the expanding effect of soft-nosed or unjacketed lead bullets.
France
France’s LOAC Summary Note (1992) states: “It is prohibited to use … projectiles that spread or flatten easily in the human body.”
France
France’s LOAC Teaching Note (2000) includes dum-dum bullets and other weapons with expanding heads in the list of weapons that “are totally prohibited by the law of armed conflict” because of their inhuman and indiscriminate character.
France
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) incorporates the content of the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets.
The manual further includes dum-dum bullets and other weapons with expanding heads in the list of weapons that “are totally prohibited by the law of armed conflict” because of their inhuman and indiscriminate character.
Germany
Germany’s Soldiers’ Manual (1991) provides: “It is prohibited to use means or methods of warfare which are intended or of a nature to cause superfluous injuries or unnecessary suffering (e.g. dum-dum bullets).”
Germany
Germany’s Military Manual (1992) states:
It is prohibited to use bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body (e.g. dum-dum bullets) … This applies also to the use of shotguns, since shot causes similar suffering unjustified from the military point of view. It is also prohibited to use projectiles of a nature:
–to burst or deform while penetrating the human body;
–to tumble early in the human body; or
–to cause shock waves leading to extensive tissue damage or even a lethal shock.

[emphasis in original]
Germany
Germany’s IHL Manual (1996) states: “International humanitarian law prohibits the use of a number of means of warfare which are of a nature to violate the principle of humanity and to cause unnecessary suffering, e.g. bullets which easily expand or flatten in the human body, so-called dum-dum bullets.”
Germany
Germany’s Soldiers’ Manual (2006) states: “It is prohibited to use means or methods which are intended or of a nature, … to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering (e.g. dum-dum bullets), …”.
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998) includes dum-dum bullets in the list of prohibited weapons.
Israel
Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) prohibits the use of “[f]ragmentation bullets or those that expand inside the human body (dum-dum bullets)”.
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) states: “It is specifically prohibited … to use bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, or bullets which are pierced with incisions.”
Kenya
Kenya’s LOAC Manual (1997) states: “The use of bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions, is prohibited.”
Mexico
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009) states: “It is prohibited to use … bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions (dum-dum bullets).”
Netherlands
The Military Manual (1993) of the Netherlands states that the use of
bullets which expand or transform inside the human body is prohibited; this is the prohibition of the so-called dum-dum bullet. These are bullets with a soft, possibly flattened head. The effect of transformation can also be obtained by using a saw or similar tool to remove the tip of the bullet.
Netherlands
The Military Handbook (1995) of the Netherlands prohibits the use of dum-dum bullets.
Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states:
It is prohibited to use bullets which fragment or expand in the human body: this is known as the ban on dum-dum bullets, bullets with a soft and possibly flattened head. The expansion effect can also be achieved by sawing off or otherwise removing the tip of a bullet (the prohibition is specified in a declaration dated 1899, which has the status of an international entente).
In its chapter on non-international armed conflict, the manual states: “It is prohibited to use weapons causing unnecessary suffering or excessive injury, or that are indiscriminate. This means that … dum-dum bullets … are forbidden.”
New Zealand
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) states that the use of “bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions (Dum Dum bullets)” is prohibited.
The manual notes that the qualification of the use of poison or poisoned weapons as a war crime “is an old-established rule of customary law and applies equally to the use of any forbidden weapon such as expanding (dum-dum) bullets”.
Nigeria
Nigeria’s Manual on the Laws of War states: “It is expressly forbidden to use … irregularly shaped bullets … The scoring of the surface of bullets and filing off of the end of their hard case … are also prohibited.”
The manual includes “using expanding bullets” in its list of war crimes.
Peru
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states that “expanding bullets” are prohibited weapons.
Peru
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states that “expanding bullets” are prohibited weapons.
Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Military Manual (1990) prohibits the use of various weapons that cause unnecessary suffering, including “bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body”.
Russian Federation
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) states: “The following shall be prohibited to use in the course of combat operations: … bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, both specially manufactured or modified to cause such an effect later on.”
Sierra Leone
Sierra Leone’s Instructor Manual (2007) provides: “It is prohibited to … [u]se weapons that can cause unnecessary suffering, e.g. exploding bullets or bullets that expand or flatten easily in human body to increase suffering.”
South Africa
South Africa’s LOAC Manual (1996) provides: “Weapons which are calculated to cause unnecessary suffering are illegal
per se. Such weapons include … dum-dum bullets.”
South Africa
South Africa’s Revised Civic Education Manual (2004) states:
i. Prohibited Weapons. The following weapons have been prohibited:
…
(2)
Expanding Bullets. The Hague Declaration outlawing them in 1899.
South Africa
South Africa’s LOAC Teaching Manual (2008) states:
3. Means and Methods of Warfare
…
Several specific weapons are governed by specific treaties. These treaties establish two categories of weapons, to wit[:]
- Weapons of which the use is totally prohibited; and
- Weapons of which the use is permitted under certain conditions.
Weapons of which the Use is Totally Prohibited
…
- Bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope, which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions, eg “dum-dum” bullets. (Hague Declaration dated 29 July 1899.)
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) imposes an “absolute prohibition on the use of … bullets that expand (Dum-Dum) or flatten easily in the human body”.
Spain
Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states that there is an absolute prohibition on the use of certain weapons, including “[b]ullets that expand (dum-dum) or flatten easily in the human body”.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Regulation on Legal Bases for Conduct during an Engagement (2005) states:
16.1 Prohibited means of warfare
…
230 The following are also prohibited during combat in armed conflicts:
1 bullets that expand or flatten in the human body (dumdum bullets)[.]
Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states that the use as a means of warfare of “bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body (bullets with a hard envelope which does not cover the core entirely or is pierced with incisions)” is prohibited.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) states that the United Kingdom engages “to abstain from the use of bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions”.
The manual further notes: “It is expressly forbidden to employ arms, projectiles or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering … such … as … irregularly-shaped bullets.”
The manual also provides: “In addition to the ‘grave breaches’ of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, … the following are examples of punishable violations of the laws of war, or war crimes: … using expanding bullets.”
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Pamphlet (1981) states: “The following are prohibited in
international armed conflict: … b. dum-dum bullets”.

(emphasis in original)
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states in its chapter on weapons:
6.9. It is prohibited to use in international armed conflicts “bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions”.
6.9.1. This prohibition is aimed at soft-nosed bullets that mushroom on impact or bullets whose casing is designed to fragment on impact causing, in either case, unnecessarily serious injuries.
United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) states: “Usage, has … established the illegality of … the scoring of the surface or the filing off of the ends of the hard cases of bullets.”
United States of America
The US Air Force Pamphlet (1976) states:
International law has condemned dum dum … bullets because of types of injuries and inevitability of death. Usage and practice has also determined that it is
per se illegal … to use irregularly shaped bullets or to score the surface or to file off the end of the hard cases of the bullets which cause them to expand upon contact and thus aggravate the wound they cause.
United States of America
The US Instructor’s Guide (1985) stresses the prohibition of “irregular-shaped bullets such as dum-dum bullets”.
The Guide also provides: “In addition to the grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, the following acts are further examples of war crimes: using … forbidden arms or ammunition such as dum-dum bullets.”
Andorra
Andorra’s Decree on Arms (1989) provides:
The manufacture, importation, circulation, possession, use, buying and selling and propaganda of the following weapons is forbidden:
…
11th Ammunition with hard centre perforating, explosive, incendiary, expanding, “dum-dum” and lead shot bullets as well as the projectiles of this kind of ammunition.
Australia
Australia’s War Crimes Act (1945) considers “any war crime within the meaning of the instrument of appointment of the Board of Inquiry [set up to investigate war crimes committed by enemy subjects]” as a war crime, including the use of expanding bullets.
Australia
Australia’s Criminal Code Act (1995), as amended to 2007, states with respect to serious war crimes that are committed in the course of an international armed conflict:
War crime – employing prohibited bullets
(1) A person (the perpetrator) commits an offence if:
(a) the perpetrator employs certain bullets; and
(b) the bullets are such that their use violates the Hague Declaration because they expand or flatten easily in the human body; and
(c) the perpetrator knows that, or is reckless as to whether, the nature of the bullets is such that their employment will uselessly aggravate suffering or the wounding effect; and
(d) the perpetrator’s conduct takes place in the context of, and is associated with, an international armed conflict.
Penalty: Imprisonment for 25 years.
(2) Strict liability applies to paragraph (1)(b).
Australia
Australia’s ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act (2002) incorporates in the Criminal Code the war crimes defined in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “employing prohibited bullets … [which] expand or flatten easily in the human body” in international armed conflicts.
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 … :
…
38. employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
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 … :
…
24. employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
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:
…
r) employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
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:
…
2. … [S]erious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
…
19°. Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
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.
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.
Côte d’Ivoire
Côte d’Ivoire’s Penal Code (1981), as amended in 2015, states:
Article 139
Whoever commits a war crime is punished with life imprisonment.
War crimes are:
…
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:
…
- employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions;
…
…
4 - 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:
…
- employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
Article 139-1
The provisions of paragraphs 3 and 4 of the above article 139 do not apply to situations of internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence or other acts of a similar nature.
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’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].
Ecuador
Ecuador’s National Civil Police Penal Code (1960) punishes the members of the National Civil Police “who use or order to be used … dum-dum bullets”.
Estonia
Under Estonia’s Penal Code (2001), “use of … expanding bullets” is a war crime.
France
France’s Penal Code (1992), as amended in 2010, states in its section on war crimes related to international armed conflict: “[The following offences] are punishable by life imprisonment: … [u]sing bullets that easily deform in the human body”.
Georgia
Under Georgia’s Criminal Code (1999), any war crime provided for by the 1998 ICC Statute that is not explicitly mentioned in the Code, such as “employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions,” in international armed conflicts, is a crime.
Germany
Germany’s Law Introducing the International Crimes Code (2002) punishes anyone who, in connection with an international or non-international armed conflict, “employs bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, in particular bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions”.
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 international armed conflicts: “Using bullets, which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope, which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced”.
Italy
Italy’s Law of War Decree (1938), as amended in 1992, provides: “It is prohibited to … use bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.”
Mali
Under Mali’s Penal Code (2001), “using bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions” is a war crime in international armed conflicts.
Netherlands
The Definition of War Crimes Decree (1946) of the Netherlands includes the “use of … expanding bullets” in its list of war crimes.
Netherlands
Under the International Crimes Act (2003) of the Netherlands, “employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions” is a crime, when committed in an international armed conflict.
New Zealand
Under New Zealand’s International Crimes and ICC Act (2000), war crimes include the crime defined in Article 8(2)(b)(xix) of the 1998 ICC Statute.
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 … employs bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body.”
Peru
Peru’s Code of Military and Police Justice (2006) states:
A member of the military or police shall be imprisoned for a period of no less than eight and no more than 15 years if he or she in the context of an international or non-international armed conflict:
…
3. Uses bullets that expand or flatten easily in the human body, in particular bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
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 Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited means in the conduct of hostilities”, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than eight years and not more than fifteen years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she:
…
3. Uses bullets which open or expand easily in the human body, in particular bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
Republic of Korea
The Republic of Korea’s ICC Act (2007) provides for the punishment of anyone who commits the war crime of employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body in both international and non-international armed conflicts.
Senegal
Senegal’s Penal Code (1965), as amended in 2007, states that the following constitute war crimes:
b) [O]ther 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:
…
16. employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
South Africa
South Africa’s ICC Act (2002) reproduces the war crimes listed in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body” in international armed conflicts.
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. 112d
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:
…
c. employs bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body[.]
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. 264h
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:
…
c. employs bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body[.]
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)(xix) of the 1998 ICC Statute.
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:
…
27. Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
Under the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’s Penal Code (1976), as amended in 2001, the use of, or the order to use, “means or methods of combat prohibited under the rules of international law, during a war or an armed conflict” is a war crime.
The commentary on the Penal Code as amended adds: “The following weapons and means of combat are considered to be prohibited: … projectiles that spread easily when they come in contact with a human body”.
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.”
Colombia
In 1995, in a ruling on the constitutionality of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, the Constitutional Court of Colombia stated in relation to the prohibition on the use of weapons of a nature to cause unnecessary suffering or superfluous injury:
Although none of the treaty rules expressly applicable to internal conflicts prohibits indiscriminate attacks or the use of certain weapons, the Taormina Declaration consequently considers that the bans (established partly by customary law and partly by treaty law) on the use of … “dum-dum” bullets … apply to non-international armed conflicts, not only because they form part of customary international law but also because they evidently derive from the general rule prohibiting attacks against the civilian population.
Algeria
At the CDDH, Algeria supported the Philippine amendment (see
infra), because “it was a simple reaffirmation of the principles of positive humanitarian law”.
Canada
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”.
Colombia
In 1975, during discussions in the Ad Hoc Committee on Conventional Weapons established by the CDDH on the legality of high-velocity weapons, Colombia stated: “Such weapons were indeed comparable to … dum-dum bullets … It was thus essential to expedite the formulation of rules prohibiting their use.”
Egypt
At the CDDH, Egypt expressed “its disappointment at the failure of the Philippine amendment, establishing as a grave breach the use of prohibited weapons, to be adopted”, but noted that Article 74 of the draft Additional Protocol I (now Article 85) “as it stands now does cover the use of such weapons through their effects”.
Ethiopia
The Report on the Practice of Ethiopia states, with reference to a press release by the Ministry of Defence: “Dum-dum bullets, which expand or flatten easily in the human body, were used during the war with Somalia in 1956.”
Finland
At the CDDH, Finland stated that it “attached the greatest importance to the prohibition of dum-dum bullets in The Hague Declaration of 1899”.
Finland
Finnish police are reported to have used hollow-point handgun bullets since 1994.

According to an article by the Finnish Senior Advisor of the Weapons Technology Police Technical Centre, the use of hollow-point expanding handgun bullets presents some advantages, such as the avoidance of danger to bystanders through over-penetration of the bullet or ricochet. The article’s author emphasizes the existence of “a very common misunderstanding”, which is that hollow-point handgun bullets cause much more tissue damage than non-deforming full metal jacket bullets. He states: “The truth, is, however, that a well designed expanding bullet causes less damage than some non-deforming full metal jacket bullet. This is because the latter starts tumbling causing an effect similar to that of an expanding bullet.” He adds:
Even when lethal ammunition are used some injury avoidance criteria must, however, be met. A bullet shall have consistent and controlled penetration thus minimising danger to bystanders while yet providing sufficient penetration in all circumstances. This is technically not possible without some braking mechanism like expansion or terminal ballistic instability. A bullet shall not cause more injury than is unavoidable. It shall not break up to fragments upon impact with soft tissue even when shot through various materials. A bullet shall have controlled trajectory. Upon impact with hard surface it shall not turn into excessively dangerous ricochets and the ricochets must not deflect significantly from the impact surface tangent.
India
The Report on the Practice of India states: “Since India has subscribed to most of the Conventions which specifically declare certain weapons as prohibited, there is no possibility of use … of expanding bullets in times of international or internal armed conflicts.” In addition, the report states that, according to India’s practice, there is “a ban and restriction on the use of … expanding bullets”.
Indonesia
On the basis of an interview with the Director of the Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Weapons Division of the Indonesian Armed Forces, the Report on the Practice of Indonesia states that Indonesia has prohibited the use of expanding bullets.
Iraq
At the CDDH, Iraq supported the Philippine amendment (see
infra), since “the use of dum-dum bullets … had been prohibited for a very long time but the user was not liable to criminal proceedings. It was high time that the use of such appalling weapons was made a grave offence.”
Italy
At the CDDH, Italy abstained in the vote on the Philippine amendment (see
infra) because “it would not be useful because it dealt with means and methods of warfare which were already prohibited by the existing law”.
Jordan
According to the Report on the Practice of Jordan, Jordan has indicated that it does not use, manufacture or stockpile expanding bullets and it has no intention of possessing nor using such weapons in the future.
Mexico
In 2009, Mexico submitted a proposal to the UN Secretary General to amend Article 8(2)(c) of the 1998 ICC Statute in accordance with Article 121(1) of the Statute, stating:
Within the category of serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflicts, the use of certain weapons whose effects are of an indiscriminate nature or cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering is included. Such weapons are … bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body. The use of these … kinds of weapons is prohibited by conventional and customary international law.

[footnotes in original omitted]
Philippines
At the CDDH, the Philippines proposed an amendment to include “the use of weapons prohibited by International Conventions, namely: bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body” in the list of grave breaches in Article 74 of the draft Additional Protocol I (now Article 85).
The proposal was rejected because it failed to obtain the necessary two-thirds majority (41 votes in favour, 25 against and 25 abstentions).
Sweden
In 1977, during a debate in the First Committee of the UN General Assembly, Sweden stated that it, “together with others”, wanted to restate the ban on expanding bullets from 1899, but that the proposal had not met with general approval.
Sweden
In 1975, during discussions in the Ad Hoc Committee on Conventional Weapons established by the CDDH, Sweden stated:
Several governments, including the US and the UK governments, had avoided a narrow interpretation of The Hague ban; their current military manuals prohibited not merely soft-nose bullets, but also irregularly-shaped bullets … It was significant that The Hague ban … had even had a decisive influence on the choice of weapons for police use, although it was not formally applicable in the domestic sphere.
Switzerland
At the CDDH, Switzerland voted in favour of the Philippine amendment (see supra) because:
It would be a step forward to state expressly that any violation of The Hague Declaration of 1899 and the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925 would constitute a grave breach. The rules laid down in those two instruments were undisputed and indisputable, and the amendment would have a deterrent effect on any State tempted to violate them, by exposing the members of its armed forces to the penalties applicable under the Geneva Conventions.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s ABC of International Humanitarian Law (2009) states:
Dumdum bullets
Dumdum bullets were first used as ammunition for firearms at the end of the 19th century. On entering the body the bullet loses velocity, and unlike a conventional bullet the dumdum tears the body tissue and fragments bone.
At the first international peace conference in The Hague (1899) the use of dumdum bullets in Armed conflict was prohibited on the grounds of cruelty and inhumanity. …
…
Weapons
International humanitarian law imposes limitations, in some cases a total ban, on the use of weapons whose impact goes beyond the permissible purpose of weakening the enemy. Weapons are prohibited on the basis of three fundamental criteria: if their use inevitably leads to death; if they cause disproportionate injury or
Unnecessary suffering; if they strike indiscriminately. On the basis of these three criteria a number of specific weapons have been explicitly prohibited by international conventions, including …
Dumdum bullets … Some of these bans are part of
Customary international law.
United States of America
In 1974, in reply to a letter from a member of the US House of Representatives, the Acting General Counsel of the US Department of Defense stated:
The United States is not a party to the agreement prohibiting the use of expanding bullets or “dum-dums”, signed at The Hague, July 29 1899. In that Agreement, the parties agreed “to abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core, or is pierced with incisions”. The United States has, however, acknowledged that it will abide by the terms of the agreement prohibiting expanding bullets.
United States of America
At the CDDH, the United States voted against the Philippine amendment (see supra) because:
Grave breaches were meant to be the most serious type of crime; Parties had an obligation to punish or extradite those guilty of them. Such crimes should therefore be clearly specified, so that a soldier would know if he was about to commit an illegal act for which he could be punished. The amendment, however, was vague and imprecise. What standard would be applied, for example, in deciding whether a bullet expanded or flattened “easily” in the human body? … It would also punish those who used the weapons, namely, the soldiers, rather than those who made the decision as to their use, namely, Governments.
United States of America
In 1983, in a memorandum on the use of small-caliber armor-piercing incendiary (API) ammunition against enemy personnel, the US Department of the Army emphasized that no US ammunition violated,
inter alia, the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets.
United States of America
In 1990, in a memorandum of law on sniper use of open-tip ammunition, the US Department of the Army stated:
The United States is not a party to [the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets], but U.S. officials over the years have taken the position that the armed forces of the United States will adhere to its terms to the extent that its application is consistent with the object and purpose of article 23e of [the 1907 Hague Regulations].
He added, however:
Wound ballistic research over the past fifteen years has determined that the prohibition contained in the 1899 Hague Declaration [concerning Expanding Bullets] is of minimal to no value, inasmuch as virtually all jacketed military bullets employed since 1899 with pointed ogival spitzer tip shape have a tendency to fragment on impact with soft tissue, harder organs, bone or the clothing and/or equipment worn by the individual soldier.
…
Weighing the increased performance of the pointed ogival spitzer tip bullet against the increased injury its break-up may bring, the nations of the world – through almost a century of practice – have concluded that the need for the former outweighs concern for the latter and does not result in unnecessary suffering as prohibited by the 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets and the 1907 Hague Convention IV. The 1899 Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets remains valid for expression of the principle that a nation may not employ a bullet that expands easily on impact for the purpose of unnecessarily aggravating the wound inflicted upon an enemy soldier.
United States of America
In 1990, in a memorandum of law on sniper use of open-tip ammunition, the US Department of the Army stated that the use of the 7.62 Norma Match ammunition with open-tip bullet is not contrary to the Hague or Geneva rules, since the
purpose of the 7.62mm “open-tip” MatchKing bullet is to provide maximum accuracy at very long range … It may fragment upon striking its target, although the probability of its fragmentation is not as great as some military ball bullets currently in use by some nations. Bullet fragmentation is not a design characteristic, however, nor a purpose for use of the MatchKing by U.S. Army snipers. Wounds caused by MatchKing ammunition are similar to those caused by a fully jacketed military ball bullet, which is legal under the law of war … The military necessity for its use … is complemented by the high degree of discriminate fire it offers.
United States of America
In 1993, in a legal review of the USSOCOM Special Operations Offensive Handgun, the US Department of the Army stated:
The Hague Declaration Concerning Expanding Bullets of 29 July 1899 prohibits the use in international armed conflict … of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions.
The United States is not a party to this declaration, but has taken the position that it will adhere to the terms of this convention and its conventional military operations to the extent that its application is consistent with the object and purpose of article 23e of the [1907 Hague Regulations].
…
The conflict spectrum clearly has changed from 1899, and the immediate incapacitation essential to the prevention of the release of dangerous materials or the murder of hostages or prisoners of war necessitates reconsideration of the 1899 prohibition in light of these changed circumstances. The Hague Declaration retains its general validity in limiting use of expanding ammunition by conventional military forces in conventional armed conflict when such use may result in superfluous injury, absent a clear showing of military necessity for its use.
United States of America
In 1996, in a legal review of the Fabrique Nationale 5.7x28mm Weapon System, the US Department of the Army stated:
The United States is not a party to [the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets], but has taken the position that it will adhere to the terms of the convention in armed conflict to the extent that its application is consistent with the object and purpose of article 23e of the [1907 Hague Regulations].
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
At the CDDH, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia voted in favour of the Philippine amendment (see supra), but because that amendment had been rejected it stated that it
deeply regrets that the use of unlawful methods or means of combat was not included in the grave breaches, particularly since to have done so would merely have been to have codified an already existing rule of customary law, because there can be no doubt that to use prohibited weapons or unlawful methods of making war is already to act unlawfully, that is, it is a war crime punishable by existing international law.
Yugoslavia, Socialist Federal Republic of
In 1991, in a document entitled “Examples of violations of the rules of international law committed by the so-called armed forces of Slovenia”, the Ministry of Defence of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia stated:
The nature of the injuries of some of the members of the Yugoslav People’s Army show that forbidden means have been used in the armed conflict, before all ammunition suitable to inflict disproportionate and needless injuries, that reduce the chances of the injured to survive.
In that respect, the injuries of [a] soldier … are characteristic. He was hit in the tip of his right forearm and the round had crumbled and split the forearm bone, the tissue and thus blew the fist of the injured to bits. In the riddled channel and the surrounding tissue, pieces of a fragmented round were found. All that implies for the use of the so-called soft-nosed bullet.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1970 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Underlining the continuing value of existing humanitarian rules relating to armed conflict, in particular the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907,
…
1.
Calls upon all parties to any armed conflict to observe the rules laid down in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1971 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Calls again upon all parties to any armed conflict to observe the rules laid down in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and other humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts, and invites those States which have not yet done so to adhere to those instruments.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1971 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Reiterates its call upon all parties to any armed conflicts to observe the rules laid down in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 … and invites those States which have not yet done so to adhere to those instruments.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1972 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly called upon “all parties to armed conflicts to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in particular the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907”.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1973 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Calls upon all parties to armed conflicts to acknowledge and to comply with their obligations under the humanitarian instruments and to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in particular the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1974 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Calls upon all parties to armed conflicts to acknowledge and to comply with their obligations under the humanitarian instruments and to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in particular the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1975 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Calls upon all parties to armed conflicts to acknowledge and to comply with their obligations under the humanitarian instruments and to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1976 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Calls upon all parties to armed conflicts to acknowledge and to comply with their obligations under the humanitarian instruments and to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in particular the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1977 on respect for human rights in armed conflicts, the UN General Assembly:
Calls upon all parties to armed conflicts to acknowledge and to comply with their obligations under the humanitarian instruments and to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in particular the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, the Geneva [Gas] Protocol of 1925 and the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
UN Secretary-General
In 1969, in a report on respect for human rights in armed conflict, the UN Secretary-General stated that some weapons which caused unnecessary suffering “have been prohibited for a long time by the international community (see for instance, the Hague Declaration of 1899 which prohibits the use of bullets ‘which expand or flatten in the human body’)”.
UN Secretariat
In 1973, a survey conducted by the UN Secretariat noted that there was a consensus that expanding bullets were prohibited under the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets.
OAU/ICRC Seminar on IHL
The first OAU/ICRC seminar on IHL for diplomats accredited to the OAU in 1994 recommended that the “Hague Law and relevant provisions regulating the means and methods of warfare such as the use of specific weapons must be applied to both international and non international conflictual situations”.
No data.
No data.
ICRC
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “The use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions, is prohibited.”
ICRC
The ICRC Commentary on the Additional Protocols states:
1419. The specific applications of the prohibition formulated in Article 23, paragraph 1(e), of the Hague Regulations, or resulting from the Declarations of St. Petersburg and The Hague, are not very numerous. They include:
…
2. “dum-dum” bullets, i.e., bullets which easily expand or flatten in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions or bullets of irregular shape or with a hollowed out nose;
…
1420. The weapons which are prohibited under the provisions of the Hague Law are, a
fortiori, prohibited under [Article 35(2) of the 1977 Additional Protocol I].
International Institute of Humanitarian Law
The Rules of International Humanitarian Law Governing the Conduct of Hostilities in Non-international Armed Conflicts, adopted in 1990 by the Council of the International Institute of Humanitarian Law, states: “The customary rule prohibiting the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as dum-dum bullets, is applicable in non-international armed conflicts.”