Geneva Convention (1929)
Article 4, fifth paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva Convention provides that belligerents shall ensure that “the dead are honourably interred”.
Geneva POW Convention
Article 76, third paragraph, of the 1929 Geneva POW Convention provides: “The belligerents shall ensure that prisoners of war who have died in captivity are honourably buried.”
Geneva Convention I
Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I provides:
[Parties to the conflict] shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, that their graves are respected, grouped if possible according to the nationality of the deceased, properly maintained and marked so that they may always be found.
Geneva Convention III
Article 120 of the 1949 Geneva Convention III provides
The detaining authorities shall ensure that prisoners of war who have died in captivity are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, and that their graves are respected, suitably maintained and marked so as to be found at any time.
Geneva Convention IV
Article 130 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV provides:
The detaining authorities shall ensure that internees who die while interned are honourably buried, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belonged, and that their graves are respected, properly maintained, and marked in such a way that they can always be recognized.
Additional Protocol II
Article 8 of the 1977 Additional Protocol II provides: “Whenever circumstances permit, and particularly after an engagement, all possible measures shall be taken, without delay, to … decently dispose of [the dead].”
Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines
Article 3(4) of Part IV of the 1998 Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and IHL in the Philippines provides that “breach of the duty … to give [those who have died in the course of the armed conflict or while under detention] decent burial” shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to persons hors de combat
. Article 4(9) provides: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay … to dispose of [the dead] with respect.”
Argentina’s Law of War Manual (1969) provides that the remains of deceased persons shall be honourably buried.
Australia’s Defence Force Manual (1994) provides: “The minimum respect for the remains of the dead is a decent burial or cremation.”
The manual further states: “The deceased should be honourably interred.”
Australia’s LOAC Manual (2006) states:
9.103 …. The minimum respect for the remains of the dead is a decent burial or cremation …
9.104 … In the case of burial the deceased shall be honourably interred.
The LOAC Manual (2006) replaces both the Defence Force Manual (1994) and the Commanders’ Guide (1994).
Belgium’s Law of War Manual (1983) provides: “The necessary measures shall be taken to bury the dead.”
Brazil’s Operations Manual for the Evacuation of Non-Combatants (2007) states: “Burial
. The Joint Command shall ensure that appropriate treatment is given to the mortal remains of military personnel and non-combatants.”
The Operations Manual also states:
1.2.1 Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations are conducted by the Ministry of Defence, upon request by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for the evacuation of non-combatants whose lives are in danger, from their host country to a safe place of destination …
3.4.1 Non-Combatant Evacuation Operations … may be triggered by sudden changes in the government of the host country, changes in its political or military orientation with regard to Brazil, or hostile threats to Brazilian citizens by internal or external forces in that country.
Annex A. Rules of Engagement and the Law of Armed Conflict
3. The Law of Armed Conflict
According to the policy of the Ministry of Defence, the principles of the Law of Armed Conflict regulate the actions taken by the Joint Command in the defence of its personnel, property and equipment.
Burundi’s Regulations on International Humanitarian Law (2007) states that “after identification, the dead must be buried individually, if the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit”.
Cameroon’s Instructor’s Manual (2006), under the heading “The Dead”, also states: “If the tactical situation permits, and after identification, the dead must be buried, incinerated or buried at sea, as appropriate.”
The manual (2006), under the heading “The Case of Deceased Prisoners of War”, also states: “The burial [or] incineration … must be preceded by a medical examination.”
Canada’s LOAC Manual (1999) provides: “Parties to the conflict shall ensure that the dead are honourably interred.”
The manual also states: “Regulations with regard to burial at sea are adjusted to meet the requirements of the situation.”
With respect to non-international armed conflicts in particular, the manual provides: “Steps must also be taken to … provide for decent disposition [of the dead]”.
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2001) provides: “The dead shall be honourably interred.”
Canada’s LOAC Manual (2001) states in its chapter on the treatment of the wounded, sick and shipwrecked:
1. The remains of all persons who have died as a result of hostilities or while in occupation or detention in relation thereto shall be respected, and their gravesites properly respected, maintained and marked.
5. Parties to the conflict shall ensure that the dead are honourably interred, if possible according to the rites of the religion to which they belong.
The manual also states: “Regulations with regard to burial at sea are adjusted to meet the requirements of the situation.”
In its chapter on non-international armed conflicts, the manual states:
After any engagement and whenever circumstances permit, all possible steps must be taken without delay to search for and collect the wounded, sick and shipwrecked … Steps must also be taken to search for the dead … and provide for their decent disposition.
Canada’s Prisoner of War Handling and Detainees Manual (2004) states:
As a general principle, subject to any religious or ethnic variations, the funeral arrangements for a PW [prisoners of war] are to be the same as those, which would be made for a member of the Canadian Forces dying in the AOO [Area of Operations].
Canada’s Code of Conduct (2005) states: “The dead shall be honourably interred.”
Central African Republic
The Central African Republic’s Instructor’s Manual (1999) states in Volume 2 (Instruction for group and patrol leaders):
The dead … must then be buried, cremated or buried at sea when the tactical situation permits and other circumstances (hygiene) permit. … Dead bodies which, owing to the circumstances, are not buried, cremated or buried at sea, must be evacuated.
In Volume 3 (Instruction for non-commissioned officers studying for the level 1 and 2 certificates and for future officers of the criminal police), the manual states: “At all times, and especially following a battle, the dead must be … buried”.
Croatia’s Commanders’ Manual (1992) provides: “As a rule, the dead shall be identified and buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.”
France’s LOAC Summary Note (1992) provides that the dead must be “identified, evacuated and buried, cremated or buried at sea”.
France’s LOAC Teaching Note (2000) states:
After combat, the dead of both sides must be identified, evacuated and buried, cremated or buried at sea. To the extent possible, the dead must in principle be buried in order to allow for the repatriation of their remains later on.
France’s LOAC Manual (2001) reproduces Article 17 of the 1949 Geneva Convention I.
Hungary’s Military Manual (1992) states: “The dead may be buried, buried at sea, cremated”.
According to Israel’s Manual on the Laws of War (1998), a “[legal] combatant is entitled to the status of a prisoner of war, according him … the right to a proper burial”.
Israel’s Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) states: “The bodies of the fallen must not be desecrated and they must be given suitable burial.”
The manual further states:
Following barbaric acts committed by soldiers, such as scalping, cutting off the ears and “collecting” fingers, the Geneva Convention was required to provide for the orderly and honourable burial of the enemy’s fallen. The pressure for this actually came from the combatants who wanted to give the last honours to their enemies and ensure that the same treatment would be accorded to their own fallen.
In addition, the manual states:
The IDF [Israel Defense Forces] maintains a cemetery where the bodies are laid to rest of terrorists killed in skirmishes with the IDF. In exchange for the return of the bodies of IDF soldiers who fell, the bodies of Hezbollah fighters were returned to it.
The Manual on the Rules of Warfare (2006) is a second edition of the Manual on the Laws of War (1998).
Italy’s LOAC Elementary Rules Manual (1991) provides: “As a general rule, the dead shall be … buried, cremated or buried at sea individually.”
Kenya’s LOAC Manual (1997) states: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually, when the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit.”
Madagascar’s Military Manual (1994) provides: “Generally, the dead shall be … buried, incinerated or buried at sea individually.”
Mexico’s Army and Air Force Manual (2009) states: “The [1949 Geneva] Convention [III] specifies burial (and, in certain cases cremation) requirements to ensure respect for the dead and to safeguard the interests of their families.”
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “Burial must be performed with dignity.”
New Zealand’s Military Manual (1992) provides: “The remains [of the dead] … shall be respected”.
The manual also states: “The regulations with regard to burial at sea are adjusted to meet the requirements of the situation.”
With respect to non-international armed conflicts, the manual states that the parties to a conflict must take steps to “provide for [the] decent disposal [of the dead]”.
Peru’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
Burial on land or at sea and cremation of the dead should be preceded by a careful examination, if possible a medical examination, of the bodies, with a view to confirming death, establishing identity and enabling a report to be made … The dead must be honourably interred … At sea, the dead should be committed to the sea, individually if circumstances permit, if they cannot be taken to land.
The manual also states that, in operational and geographic areas, commanders must “formulate an evacuation plan, in collaboration with the civilian authorities, and give instructions and specify measures for each evacuation line (for example, … bodily remains)”.
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states:
Burial on land or at sea and cremation of the dead should be preceded by a careful examination, if possible a medical examination, of the bodies, with a view to confirming death, establishing identity and enabling a report to be made. … The dead must be honourably interred.
The manual further states that, in operational and geographic areas, commanders must “formulate an evacuation plan, in collaboration with the civilian authorities, and give instructions and specify measures for each evacuation line (for example, … bodily remains)”.
The Military Instructions (1989) of the Philippines provides: “Evacuation of all dead bodies must be done … and arrangements for a decent burial made.”
The Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (2006) provides:
After an engagement:
6. Bring the bodies to the police, if possible and demand receipt. If possible, bring the dead to proper authorities. If not, bury them and mark their graves so they can be retrieved later. This will dispel any doubts of foul play.
7. Inform immediately the bereaved families of the dead. Inform immediately the families of the dead. This includes the dead enemies and crossfire victims. Crossfire victims are entitled of burial assistance from the government. Provide whatever assistance to the families of the dead, to include financial help, if possible.
Peru’s IHL and Human Rights Manual (2010) states: “Bodies should only be cremated for imperative reasons of hygiene or for reasons connected to the religion of the deceased.”
Poland’s Procedures Governing the Interment of Soldiers Killed in Action (2009) defines “Emergency burial” as “[a] burial, usually on the battlefield, when conditions do not permit evacuation for burial in a cemetery”.
The Procedures further states in the section on the disposal of persons who have died in combat: “Prior to burial, the body shall be placed in a coffin or sealed container. If no coffins or other sealed containers are available, the body may be wrapped in a shroud, waterproof material, or at least a blanket.”
The Procedures also states: “Civilian members of the armed forces who had not participated in hostilities shall be buried in line with procedures established for the burial of the bodies of soldiers.”
The Procedures further states:
The bodies of persons who have died on the open seas should be disposed of by lowering the body into the sea, in line with naval custom.
If the ship is able to reach port within 24 hours, the remains shall be transported onto land and buried there. In that case, the burial shall be conducted in accordance with procedures pertaining to burial on land.
The Russian Federation’s Military Manual (1990) states that the emergency disposal of the dead is one of the activities of civil defence that helps eliminate the immediate effects of hostilities or disaster.
The Russian Federation’s Regulations on the Application of IHL (2001) provides:
Search for, collection, identification and burial of the dead members of the enemy armed forces as well as of other victims of armed conflicts shall be organized immediately, as soon as the situation permits, and carried out to … bury them with due dignity and respect as required by ethical principles.
With regard to internal armed conflict, the Regulations states: “Whenever circumstances permit and particularly after an engagement, all possible measures shall be taken, without delay … to search for the dead [and] to decently dispose of them.”
Spain’s LOAC Manual (1996) states: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea as soon as the tactical situation and other circumstances permit.”
Spain’s LOAC Manual (2007) states that “the dead must be buried or cremated … when the tactical situation or other circumstances permit”.
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) provides: “Burial shall be honourable.”
Togo’s Military Manual (1996) provides that the dead “shall be buried, incinerated or disposed of at sea individually when the tactical situation or other circumstances (hygiene) so permit”.
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states:
1.4.12. … As soon as the circumstances allow, all parties to an armed conflict shall … organize the search for the dead to … ensure their proper burial.
188.8.131.52. … Measures to search for, collect, identify and bury the dead shall be organized as soon as the situation permits. Those measures shall be aimed at the … dignified burial [of the dead] according to general human principles.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides that “the belligerents must make provision for honourable interment” of the dead.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK LOAC Manual (2004) states:
7.35 The remains of the dead are to be honourably interred (unless burial at sea is appropriate) …
7.36. Graves must be respected and properly maintained. …
7.37. Exhumation is permitted only (a) in accordance with an agreement on the matters dealt with in paragraph 7.36; or (b) in accordance with overriding public necessity (which may include “medical or investigative necessity”). In such circumstances, the authorities of the territory in which the grave sites are situated are required to respect the remains and to give notice to the home state of the intended exhumation together with details of the intended place of re-interment. However, these provisions do not prevent the exhumation of temporary graves for the purpose of moving the remains to permanent graves in dignified, properly maintained cemeteries, such as those of the Commonwealth War Graves Commission.
In its chapter on internal armed conflict, the manual states: “The dead must not be despoiled or ill-treated and must be decently disposed of.”
With regard to internal armed conflicts in which the 1977 Additional Protocol II is applicable, the manual further states:
Whenever circumstances permit, and particularly after an engagement, all possible measures shall be taken without delay … to search for the dead, prevent their being despoiled and decently dispose of them.
United States of America
The US Field Manual (1956) states that parties to the conflict “shall further ensure that the dead are honourably interred”.
United States of America
The US Operational Law Handbook (1993) provides: “The Parties must ensure proper burial.”
United States of America
The US Manual on Detainee Operations (2008) states:
a. As a subset of military operations, detainee operations must comply with the law of war during all armed conflicts, however such conflicts are characterized, and in all other military operations …
c. The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 are fully applicable as a matter of international law to all military operations that qualify as international armed conflicts … The principles reflected in these treaties are considered customary international law, binding on all nations during international armed conflict. Although often referred to collectively as the “Geneva Conventions,” the specific treaties are:
(2)  Geneva Convention [II]
… This convention … provides for burial at sea.
Azerbaijan’s Law concerning the Protection of Civilian Persons and the Rights of Prisoners of War (1995) provides:
The appropriate authorities and governmental bodies of the Azerbaijan Republic shall ensure that the necessary measures be taken that: … the dead bodies of persons who are not citizens of the State concerned and died of wounds or in prison, and whose death is connected with the military operations or occupation, should be buried with the necessary respect.
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime.
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].
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, provides that any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 17 of the Geneva Convention I, Article 20 of the Geneva Convention II, Article 120 of the Geneva Convention III and Article 130 of the Geneva Convention IV, as well as any “contravention” of the 1977 Additional Protocol II, including violations of Article 8, are punishable offences.
Italy’s Law of War Decree (1938), as amended in 1992, provides that commanders shall take all the necessary measures “to give [the dead] an honourable burial”.
Norway’s Military Penal Code (1902), as amended in 1981, provides:
Anyone who contravenes or is accessory to the contravention of provisions relating to the protection of persons or property laid down in … the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … [and in] the two additional protocols to these Conventions … is liable to imprisonment.
Sri Lanka’s Emergency Regulations (2005), as amended to 2008, states:
54. Where a police officer or member of the armed forces has reason to believe that the death of any person may have been caused as a result of any action taken in the course of duty either by him or by any subordinate officer as the case may be, or where any person dies in police custody or military custody, the Superintendent of Police in charge of the division to which such police officer is attached or in the case of a member of the armed forces the Commanding Officer of the Unit to which he belongs … shall … [n]otwithstanding anything to the contrary to Chapter XXX [relating to inquests of deaths], and Section 9, of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, No. 15 of 1979 [giving power to the Magistrates’ court to inquire into sudden deaths] or the provisions of any other written law for the time being in force … report the facts relating to such death to the Inspector-General of Police or the nearest Deputy Inspector-General of Police.
(2) The Deputy Inspector-General of Police to whom the body is handed over … may in the interest of national security or for the maintenance or preservation of public order, authorize the taking possession of and effecting the burial or cremation of the dead body in accordance with such steps as he may deem necessary in the circumstances.
58A. Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this regulation, where death is caused to a police officer or a member of the armed forces, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to the Ministry of the Minister in charge of the subject of Defence, –
(a) to instruct the Inspector-General of Police or the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army, the Commander of the Sri Lanka Navy or the Commander of the Sri Lanka Air Force as the case may be, to take all such measures as may be necessary for the cremation or burial of the dead body, subject to such restrictions and conditions as he may impose in the interest of national security, or for the maintenance or preservation of public order; or
(b) to direct the Inspector-General of Police to take such steps as are set out in regulation 54 in respect of such death and accordingly the provisions of regulations 55, 56, 57 and 58 shall thereupon be applicable.
Venezuela’s Code of Military Justice (1998), as amended, punishes “those who do not take care of the burial, cremation or burial at sea of the dead”.
In its ruling in the Barake case
in 2002, dealing with the question of when, how and by whom the mortal remains of Palestinians who died in a battle in Jenin refugee camp should be identified and buried, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated: “Needless to say, the burial will be made in an appropriate and respectful manner, maintaining the respect for the dead … [T]he burial will be conducted in a respectful manner, conforming to religious laws, and as soon as possible.”
In its judgment in Physicians for Human Rights v Commander of IDF Forces in the Gaza Strip in 2004, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated:
Our assumption is that the fundamental principle that the dignity of local residents must be protected, as enshrined in section 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, encompasses not only local residents who are living, but also the dead. Compare Fourth Geneva Convention, §130; see Pictet, at 506; see also HCJ 3436/02 The International Custodian of Terra Santa v. The Government of Israel, at 22, 25. Human dignity includes the dignity of the living and the dignity of the dead. The same applies with regard to domestic Israeli law. See CA 294/91 Jerusalem Community Jewish Burial Society v. Kestenbaum, at 464; FH HCJ 3299/93 Wikselbaum v. The Minister of Defense, at 195; CA 6024/97 Shavit v. Rishon Lezion Jewish Burial Society, at 600. “The protection of the dead and their dignity is just like the protection of the living and their dignity.” See Justice J. Türkel in HCJ 81/66 The Inspector-General of The Israel Police v. Ramla Magistrate Court Judge Mr. Baizer, at 337, 353. The military commander is duty-bound to search for and locate dead bodies. See HCJ 3117/02 The Center for the Defense of the Individual – Founded by Dr. Lota Salzberger v. The Minister of Defense, at 17, 18. After bodies are found, he is obligated to ensure that they are accorded a dignified burial. In the Barake case, which discussed the duty of the military commander regarding dead bodies during army operations, we stated:
Our starting point is that, under the circumstances, respondents are responsible for the location, identification, evacuation and burial of the bodies. This is their obligation under international law. Respondents accept this position … The location, identification, and burial of bodies are important humanitarian acts. They are a direct consequence of the principle of respect for the dead – respect for all dead. They are fundamental to our existence as a Jewish and democratic state. Respondents declared that they are acting according to this approach, and this attitude seems appropriate to us … Indeed, it is usually possible to agree on humanitarian issues. Respect for the dead is important to us all, as man was created in the image of God. All parties hope to finish the location, identification, and burial process as soon as possible. Respondents are willing to include representatives of the Red Cross and, during the identification stage after the location and evacuation stages, local authorities as well (subject to specific decision of the military commander). All agree that burials should be performed with respect, according to religious custom, in a timely manner. Id, at 15.
The army attempted to act according to these principles in the case at hand. The dead were identified and transferred to A-Najar Hospital. At both these stages the Red Cross and the Red Crescent were involved. The problem here, however, concerned burial. Respondent was obviously prepared to bury the dead, but it believed that it had discharged this duty by transferring the bodies to A-Najar Hospital. This was not the case. The duty of the respondent is to ensure a dignified burial for the bodies. To this end, he must negotiate with the local authorities, to the extent that they are functioning, and find respectful ways to carry out this duty. As is clear from the information presented to us, the main difficulty which arose was the participation of the relatives of the dead. This matter was in the power of the respondent, whose forces controlled all entrances and exits to Tel A-Sultan, and respondent was obviously limited by security considerations. Apparently, the later proposals should have been proposed earlier. The changing position of respondent indicates that it did not prepare for the situation in advance, and it improvised the proposed solutions on the spot. This should not have happened. Preparations for dealing with the dead should have been planned in advance. Clear procedures should be fixed regarding the different stages of the process. Of course, if, at the end of the day, the dead are in a hospital and their relatives refuse to bury them, they should not be forced to do so. Nevertheless, everything should be done in order to reach an agreement on this matter.
The Report on the Practice of Algeria notes that during the Algerian war of independence, “Algerian soldiers on occasion buried enemy personnel who died in combat”.
Islamic Republic of Iran
According to the Report on the Practice of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is the opinio juris
of the Islamic Republic of Iran, based on practice during the Iran–Iraq War, that, where dead combatants cannot be returned to the relevant party, they should be buried.
According to the Report on the Practice of Israel, the Israel Defense Forces are sensitive to the correct and proper treatment of remains and have established detailed internal regulations and procedures concerning their burial.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 2003, in a written reply to a question in the House of Lords, the UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence, stated:
The Deployed Operating Instructions issued to all United Kingdom military units state that enemy dead are to be treated the same as UK military dead. This includes a direction that, where next of kin cannot be traced, the bodies are to be given the same funeral as would UK military personnel, subject to religious practices.
In 2013, in a reply to a member of parliament, Zimbabwe’s Deputy Minister of Home Affairs stated:
[R]egarding the reburial of people who died during the war of liberation … [t]hese people’s remains were exhumed and reburied in a decent way. … [I]f [anybody] know[s] of any place where there are some people who died during the war, please come and report to [the] Ministry [of Home Affairs, which] will exhume the remains and rebury them decently.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 2005 on human rights and forensic science, the UN Commission on Human Rights underlined “the importance of dignified handling of human remains, including their proper management and disposal, as well as of respect for the needs of families”.
UN Commission on Human Rights (Special Rapporteur)
In 1996, the Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions identified as a particular concern a report that the bodies of six civilians who had been beaten and summarily executed by the Papua New Guinea Defence Forces were dumped at sea from helicopters.
UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992)
In 1994, in its final report on grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other violations of IHL committed in the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission of Experts Established pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992) noted that “interment should be carried out in an honourable fashion”.
In February 1995, in a statement before the Permanent Council of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) on the situation in Chechnya, the EU stated that the proposal to establish a “humanitarian truce” appeared essential in order to provide the victims with a decent burial.
To fulfil its task of disseminating IHL, the ICRC has delegates around the world teaching armed and security forces that: “The dead shall be buried, cremated or buried at sea individually, when the tactical situation and other circumstances (e.g. hygiene) permit.”
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards
The Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights of Åbo Akademi University in Turku/Åbo, Finland in 1990, states: “Every possible measure shall be taken, without delay, … to dispose of [the dead] with respect.”