The Defence of Superior Orders in the Modern Law of Armed Conflict

Authors

  • L.C. Green

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29173/alr1212

Abstract

The Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols refer to grave breaches of the laws of armed conflict and to punishment and prevention of such breaches. Every military system demands obedience by inferiors to the orders of superiors. A principle of customary law requires an inferior to disobey orders that are so manifestly illegal that he must or ought to have know that they were unlawful. Despite the silence of the Geneva Conventions and Protocol I on defences that might be raised by anyone charged with such breaches, the customary law regarding war crimes applies not only to offences against the laws and customs of war but to breaches of the Geneva Conventions and the Protocol. This situation has not changed substantially as a result of the Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind as it reiterates the provisions established in customary law. If adopted, it would provide a treaty provision recognizing the limited validity of the defence of superior orders not for all war crimes but for those which are "exceptionally serious" and for other crimes against peace and security. War crimes in the traditional sense and "grave breaches" described in the Geneva Conventions and Protocol I are dealt with by customary law.

Downloads

Issue

Vol 31, No 2

Section

Articles

License

For Editions following and including Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License

For Editions prior to Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.

Author(s) retain original copyright in the substantive content of the titled work, subject to the following rights that are granted indefinitely:

  1. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to produce, publish, disseminate, and distribute the titled work in electronic format to online database services, including, but not limited to: LexisNexis, QuickLaw, HeinOnline, and EBSCO;
  2. Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to post the titled work on the Alberta Law Review website and/or related websites.
  3. Author(s) agree that the titled work may be used for educational or instructional purposes and/or in educational or instructional materials. The author(s) acknowledge that the titled work is subject to other such "fair dealing" provisions and applicable legislation.
  4. Author(s) grant a limited license to those accessing the titled work from an electronic database or an Alberta Law Review website to download the titled work onto their computer and to print a copy for their own personal, non-commercial use, subject to proper attribution.

To use the journal's content elsewhere, permission must be obtained from the author(s) and the Alberta Law Review.