Соответствующая норма
Canada
Practice Relating to Rule 30. Persons and Objects Displaying the Distinctive Emblem
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) states, with respect to non-international armed conflicts in particular:
Medical and religious personnel, together with medical units and transports shall, under the direction of the competent authority concerned, display the distinctive emblem of the Red Cross or Red Crescent which emblem is to be respected at all times. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 17-4, § 33.
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) states:
International law provides special protection to personnel and facilities displaying the Red Cross or Red Crescent … Medical personnel and their medical facilities/buildings and transport displaying the distinctive emblem must not be attacked. 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 4 June 2001, Rule 10, § 1.
Rule 10 of Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) states:
1. International law provides special protection to personnel and facilities displaying the Red Cross or Red Crescent. To secure such protection, all forces should display the Red Cross/Red Crescent on their medical personnel, facilities and transports. Medical personnel and their medical facilities/buildings and transport displaying the distinctive emblem must not be attacked …
4. … The Red Cross/Red Crescent flag will only be used on medical establishments or units entitled to protection under the Geneva Convention. 
Canada, Code of Conduct for CF Personnel, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 2005, Rule 10, §§ 1 and 4.
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.