Соответствующая норма
Canada
Practice Relating to Rule 81. Restrictions on the Use of Landmines
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999), under the heading “Use of authorized land mines”, states:
All feasible precautions must be taken to protect civilians from the effects of land mines … They must not be directed at civilians nor may they be used indiscriminately. It is indiscriminate to:
(a) place mines … so that they are not on or not directed at a legitimate target;
(b) use a means of delivery for mines … that cannot be directed at a legitimate target; and
(c) place mines … so that they may be expected to cause collateral civilian damage that is excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 5-5, § 44.
With respect to remotely delivered mines, the manual provides that they
can only be used within the area of a military objective if their location can be accurately recorded, and they can be neutralized when they no longer serve the military purpose for which they were placed in position. Each mine must have: (a) an effective self neutralizing or destroying mechanism; or (b) a remotely controlled mechanism designed to render the mine harmless or destroy it. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Level, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 1999, p. 5-5, § 50.
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001), in its chapter entitled “Restrictions on the use of weapons”, states with respect to the use of authorized landmines:
All feasible precautions must be taken to protect civilians from the effects of land mines … They must not be directed at civilians nor may they be used indiscriminately. It is indiscriminate to:
a. place mines … so that they are not on or not directed at a legitimate target;
b. use a means of delivery for mines … that cannot be directed at a legitimate target; and
c. place mines … so that they may be expected to cause collateral civilian damage that is excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 523.4.
With respect to the use of remotely-delivered mines, the manual states:
1. A “remotely-delivered mine” is a mine not directly emplaced but delivered by artillery, missile, rocket, mortar or similar means, or dropped from an aircraft. Mines delivered from a land-based system from less than 500 metres are not considered to be “remotely delivered”.
2. Remotely-delivered land mines can only be used within the area of a military objective if their location can be accurately recorded, and they can be neutralized when they no longer serve the military purpose for which they were placed in position. Each mine must have:
a. an effective self neutralizing or destroying mechanism; or
b. a remotely controlled mechanism designed to render the mine harmless or destroy it.
3. If circumstances permit, effective advance warning should be given where remotely-delivered mines are likely to affect civilians. 
Canada, The Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, Office of the Judge Advocate General, 13 August 2001, § 524.
Upon acceptance of the 1996 Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Canada stated:
Canada reserves the right to transfer and use a small number of mines prohibited under this Protocol to be used exclusively for training and testing purposes. Canada will ensure that the number of such mines shall not exceed that absolutely necessary for such purposes. 
Canada, Reservation made upon acceptance of Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, 26 June 1998.
Canada also declared:
1. It is understood that the provisions of Amended Protocol II shall, as the context requires, be observed at all times.
2. It is understood that the word “primarily” is included in Article 2, paragraph 3 of Amended Protocol II to clarify that mines designed to be detonated by the presence, proximity or contact of a vehicle as opposed to a person, that are equipped with anti-handling devices, are not considered anti-personnel mines as a result of being so equipped.
3. It is understood that the maintenance of a minefield referred to in Article 10, in accordance with the standards on marking, monitoring and protection by fencing or other means set out in Amended Protocol II, would not be considered as a use of the mines contained therein. 
Canada, Statements of understanding made upon acceptance of Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, 26 June 1998, §§ 1–3.
At the First Annual Conference of High Contracting Parties to Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons in 1999, Canada stated that it
continues to have serious concerns about reports concerning the indiscriminate use of anti-personnel mines by the Russian military in the context of the ongoing conflict in Chechnya … Many of these mines were remotely delivered against no apparent military target … Moreover, Russian forces appear to have undertaken few if any steps to protect civilians in that conflict from the effects of mines, for example through the posting of signs, sentries or fences around known mined areas.
It also voiced its concerns
about recent public reports that representatives of the state-owned Pakistan Ordnance Factories are alleged to have offered anti-personnel mines for sale to a private UK citizen in direct violation of their obligations under the Amended Protocol II to the [Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons]. 
Canada, Statement at the First Annual Conference of High Contracting Parties to Amended Protocol II to the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, Geneva, 15 December 1999.
At the Second Meeting of States Parties to the Ottawa Convention on Anti-Personnel Mines in 2000, Canada stated:
It is important to highlight the indiscriminate use of landmines by both Russian and Chechen forces in Chechnya – surely one of the most serious setbacks for the already minimal norms regarding mine use contained within the Landmines Protocol of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. 
Canada, Statement at the Second Meeting of States Parties to the Ottawa Convention on Anti-Personnel Mines, Geneva, 11–15 September 2000.
In 2013, Canada’s Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development issued a press release entitled “Harper Government observes the International Day for Mine Awareness”, which stated:
Today, on the International Day for Mine Awareness and Assistance in Mine Action, the Honourable Julian Fantino, Minister of International Cooperation, highlighted a few of the ways that Canada is helping to eradicate the use of landmines and enhance the lives of landmine survivors.
Most often the victim of a landmine isn’t a combatant: instead it’s a child, a woman, or a man simply going about their daily lives … Our Government is proud to contribute to programs that help prevent future accidents. 
Canada, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development, “Harper Government observes the International Day for Mine Awareness”, Press Release, 4 April 2013.