No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 September 2022
Legal commentaries are a type of secondary source that provides clarity about the meaning of treaty provisions so they can be appropriately interpreted and applied by practitioners. Since 1870, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has produced such commentaries on each successive international humanitarian law (IHL) treaty or update to an existing treaty. Over time, who drafts these commentaries and the methodology behind them has evolved, from early commentaries written by a single jurist who had participated in the drafting of the treaty to multi-authored works based on extensive research and the methodology found in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. The ICRC Commentaries have always been geared towards those tasked with applying IHL, but this audience has expanded over time, giving them a more global reach, and their reception has evolved accordingly. The most recent iteration of the ICRC Commentaries on the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols is currently being produced, with some changes in methodology to guarantee that they remain a practical tool for the interpretation and application of those instruments.
This article is based a blog post by the present authors, “From the Gilded Age to the Digital Age: The Evolution of ICRC Legal Commentaries”, Cross-files, 8 June 2022, available at: https://blogs.icrc.org/cross-files/the-evolution-of-icrc-legal-commentaries/. Many thanks to Jean-Marie Henckaerts, Kubo Mačák, Begümhan İdikut Şimşir and Ismaël Raboud for their comments on an earlier draft.
1 See, for example, Tougas, Marie-Louise, “Commentary on Part I of the Montreux Document on Pertinent International Legal Obligations and Good Practices for States Related to Operations of Private Military and Security Companies during Armed Conflict”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 96, No. 893, 2015Google Scholar.
2 Gustave Moynier, Etude sur la Convention de Genève pour l'amélioration du sort des militaires blessés dans les armées en campagne: 1864 et 1868, Librairie de J. Cherbuliez, Paris, 1870. All the commentaries mentioned in this article are available for consultation in the ICRC Library. Most of them have been digitized and can be downloaded via the library's catalogue at: https://library.icrc.org/library/ (all internet references were accessed in September 2022).
3 Djeffal, Christian, “Commentaries on the Law of Treaties: A Review Essay Reflecting on the Genre of Commentaries”, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 24, No. 4, 2013, p. 1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar, available at: https://academic.oup.com/ejil/article/24/4/1223/606393.
4 G. Moynier, above note 2.
5 The ancestor of the present journal, published by the ICRC between 1869 and 1919.
6 See Raboud, Ismaël, Niederhauser, Matthieu and Mohr, Charlotte, “Reflections on the Development of the Movement and International Humanitarian Law through the Lens of the ICRC Library's Heritage Collection”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 100, No. 907–909, 2018, p. 153CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7 For a more substantial and nuanced take, see Cotter, Cédric, “The Role of Experience and the Place of History in the Writings of ICRC Presidents”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 101, No. 910, 2019CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8 G. Moynier, above note 2, p. 65 (authors’ translation).
9 Nevertheless, in the Franco-German War of 1870–71 and the Spanish-American War of 1898, the parties agreed to observe their provisions. It was not before the First Hague Peace Conference of 1899 that a Convention for the Adaptation to Maritime Warfare of the Principles of the Geneva Convention was finally adopted and ratified.
10 He engaged in particular with criticism of the Convention published by the Austrian regimental physician Dr Albert Michaëlis in the journal Allgemeine Militäräztliche Zeitung: Beiträge zur Wiener Medizinischen Presse (see, for instance, his article 'Gedanken über den Sanitätsdienst im Treffen mit Beziehung auf das bezügliche k. k. Reglement und auf die Berührungspunkte mit den in Genf gemachten Vorschlägen', published in that journal on 18 September 1864). See G. Moynier, above note 2, pp. 63–64, 134–135, 177–182, 191–193.
11 See, notably, G. Moynier, above note 2, pp. 191–196.
12 Ibid., p. 31 (authors’ translation). The original quote in French reads: “Pour parler sans figure, les traités spéciaux destinés à atténuer les horreurs de la guerre iront vraisemblablement en se multipliant, ceux qui existent déjà en appelleront d'autres, soit pour les perfectionner, soit pour en combler les lacunes, et ainsi la législation internationale reflétera toujours mieux les mœurs contemporaines. Peut-être même en viendra-t-on à une codification générale du droit guerrier.”
13 ICRC, “Le Comité international et la Conférence de 1906”, Bulletin International des Sociétés de la Croix-Rouge, Vol. 37, No. 148, 1906, pp. 270–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar (authors’ translation).
14 Ernst Röthlisberger, Die neue Genfer Konvention vom 6. Juli 1906, A. Francke, Bern, 1908.
15 “No one was better qualified than the Secretary General of the 1906 Geneva Conference … to present, on the content of this pact between nations, a systematic study whose value rests on the author's expertise on international questions.” “Ernst Röthlisberger – la nouvelle Convention de Genève”, Bulletin International des Sociétés de la Croix-Rouge, Vol. 39, No. 155, 1908, pp. 254–255 (authors’ translation).
16 ICRC, Minutes of Meeting, Plenary Session of the Committee, 26 September 1929, ICRC Archives.
17 Max Huber, “Preface”, in Paul Des Gouttes, La Convention de Genève du 27 juillet 1929: Commentaire, ICRC, Geneva, 1930, p. xviii.
18 He notably borrowed a phrase from Röthlisberger: “It has been rightly said that an ambulance without its equipment is like a knife without a blade.” P. Des Gouttes, above note 17, pp. 91–92.
19 Werner, Georges, “Les prisonniers de guerre”, Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International, Vol. 21, 1928Google Scholar.
20 ICRC, above note 16.
21 Gustav Rasmussen, Code des prisonniers de guerre: Commentaire de la Convention du 27 juillet 1929 relative au traitement des prisonniers de guerre, Levin & Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1931; Georges Werner, “Un commentaire du Code des prisonniers de guerre”, Revue Internationale de la Croix-Rouge, Vol. 14, No. 159, 1932.
22 Alfons Waltzog, Recht der Landkriegsführung: Die wichtigsten Abkommen des Landkriegsrecht, F. Vahlen, Berlin, 1942.
23 Christ, Werner, “Die wichtigsten Abkommen des Landkriegsrechts”, Revue Internationale de la Croix-Rouge, Vol. 27, No. 316, April 1945, p. 309–310Google Scholar (authors’ translation). The original quote in French reads: “On n'y trouve pas l'exposé comparatif des thèses qui se sont fait jour dans les différents pays quant à l'application des dispositions conventionnelles, mais bien surtout le reflet des tendances qui prévalent en Allemagne ou même d'opinions personnelles, dont certaines apparaissent comme contestables et qui souvent, selon nous, s’écartent de l'esprit qui a inspiré les Conventions de Genève.”
24 Jean Pictet (ed.), Commentaires des Conventions de Genève du 12 août 1949, 4 vols, ICRC, Geneva, 1952–58; Jean Pictet (ed.), Commentary on the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, 4 vols, ICRC, Geneva, 1952–60.
25 Jean Pictet (ed.), Commentary on the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Vol. 1: Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, ICRC, Geneva, 1952 (1952 Commentary on GC I), p. 8.
26 ICRC, Minutes of Meeting, Working Session, 30 April 1953, ICRC Archives.
27 Yves Sandoz, Christophe Swinarski and Bruno Zimmermann (eds), Commentaire des protocoles additionnels du 8 juin 1977 aux Conventions de Genève du 12 août 1949, ICRC, Geneva, 1986; Yves Sandoz, Christophe Swinarski and Bruno Zimmermann (eds), Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, ICRC, Geneva, 1987 (ICRC Commentary on the APs).
28 Eberlin, Philippe, “Underwater Acoustic Identification of Hospital Ships”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 28, No. 267, 1988, p. 518CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
29 Yves Sandoz, Christophe Swinarski and Bruno Zimmermann (eds), Comentario del Protocolo del 8 de junio de 1977 adicional a los Convenios de Ginebra de 12 de agosto de 1949 relativo a la protecciòn de las vìctimas de los conflictos armados internacionales (Protocolo I), Comentario … sin caracter internacional (Protocolo II) y del articulo 3 de estos Convenios, 3 vols, ICRC, Bogotá, 1998–2001.
30 Dominique Loye, Annexe (I) du Protocole (I): Règlement relatif à l'identification (tel qu'amendé le 30 novembre 1993): Commentaire de 2002, 2002, available at: https://tinyurl.com/3kkuxbuj. The 2002 commentary on Annex I, like its 1987 predecessor, comments on the annex article by article.
31 Jean- François Quéguiner, “Commentaire du Protocole additionnel aux Conventions de Genève du 12 août 1949 relatif à l'adoption d'un signe distinctif additionnel (Protocole III)”, Revue International de la Croix-Rouge: Sélection Française, Vol. 88, 2006; Jean-François Quéguiner, “Commentary on the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem (Protocol III)”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 89, No. 865, 2007.
32 See, announcing the start of the project, Henckaerts, Jean-Marie, “Bringing the Commentaries on the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols into the Twenty-First Century”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 94, No. 888, 2012CrossRefGoogle Scholar, available at: https://international-review.icrc.org/articles/bringing-commentaries-geneva-conventions-and-their-additional-protocols-twenty-first.
33 See, for example, comments by Lijnzaad, Liesbeth and Githiora, Titus K. in Longuet, Samuel, Tropini, Julien, Sinon, Alice and Lesaffre, Pauline, “Conference on the ICRC Updated Commentary on the First Geneva Convention: Capturing 60 Years of Practice”, Military Law and the Law of War Review, Vol. 56, No. 1, 2017–18, pp. 178, 211Google Scholar; Steven Hill, “Geneva Convention III Commentary: Implementing POW Convention in Multinational Operations”, Just Security, 28 October 2020, available at: www.justsecurity.org/73074/geneva-convention-iii-commentary-implementing-pow-convention-in-multinational-operations/; Tim Wood, “GCIII Commentary: Removing Ambiguity on the Treatment of Prisoners of War”, Humanitarian Law & Policy Blog, 29 October 2020, available at: https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2020/10/29/gciii-commentary-removing-ambiguity/. For video testimony on the utility of the updated Commentaries from practitioners and ICRC staff, see ICRC, “Third Geneva Convention – Updated Commentary”, 8 April 2021, available at: www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=HoEM7qFUWC4.
34 Cameron, Lindsey, La Haye, Eve, Nierbergall-Lackner, Heike, Henckaerts, Jean-Marie and Demeyere, Bruno, “The Updated Commentary on the First Geneva Convention: A New Tool for Generating Respect for International Humanitarian Law”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 97, No. 900, 2016, p. 1212Google Scholar, available at: https://international-review.icrc.org/articles/updated-commentary-first-geneva-convention-new-tool-generating-respect-international.
35 The composition of the Editorial Committee has changed slightly for each Commentary published so far. For the Commentary Geneva Convention I, the Editorial Committee was made up of (in alphabetical order) Knut Dörmann, then chief legal officer and head of the ICRC's Legal Division; Liesbeth Lijnzaad, a judge on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea; Marco Sassòli, professor at the University of Geneva; and Philippe Spoerri, the ICRC's then director of international law and cooperation. The Editorial Committee for the Commentary on Geneva Convention II was made up of Knut Dörmann, Liesbeth Lijnzaad, Marco Sassòli and Philippe Spoerri. The Editorial Committee for the Commentary on Geneva Convention III was made up of Knut Dörmann, who at that time was the ICRC's head of delegation in Brussels; Cordula Droege, the ICRC's incoming chief legal officer and head of the Legal Division; Helen Durham, the ICRC's incoming director of law and policy; Liesbeth Lijnzaad; Marco Sassòli; Philip Spoerri, who at that time was the ICRC's head of delegation in New York; and Brigadier General Kenneth Watkin (ret.), a former judge advocate from the Canadian Armed Forces. For the forthcoming Commentary on Geneva Convention IV, the Editorial Committee consists of Knut Dörmann; Cordula Droege; Liesbeth Lijnzaad; Nils Melzer, the incoming ICRC director of law, diplomacy and policy; Marco Sassòli; and Wing Commander Tim Wood, chief legal adviser at Headquarters Joint Forces New Zealand.
36 Jean-Marie Henckaerts, “The Impact of Commentaries on Compliance with International Law”, in American Society of International Law, Proceedings of the 115th Annual Meeting, 3 March 2021, p. 56, available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/amp.2021.99.
37 This is the case for another prominent Commentary on the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols: Andrew Clapham, Paola Gaeta and Marco Sassoli (eds), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2015.
38 Carl Lueder, La Convention de Genève au point de vue historique, critique et dogmatique, ICRC, Geneva, and Eduard Besold, Erlangen, 1876.
39 P. Des Gouttes, above note 17, pp. 72–86.
40 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1155 UNTS 331, 22 May 1969 (entered into force 27 January 1980) (VCLT).
41 G. Moynier, above note 2, pp. 143–144: “On a été jusqu’à prétendre que les corps sanitaires, classés dans beaucoup de pays parmi les combattants, pourraient être considérés comme une force militaire. Mais cet exemple, par son exagération même, nous rassure au lieu de nous alarmer. Confronté avec l'esprit général de la Convention, ne montre-t-il pas à quelles subtilités inouïes la critique est contrainte de recourir pour battre en brèche un texte qui, s'il n'est pas irréprochable, est du moins fort intelligible et serre d'aussi près que possible la pensée des rédacteurs.”
42 P. Des Gouttes, above note 17, p. 191 (authors’ translation).
43 ICRC, “Schéma relatif à l’établissement des Commentaires des nouvelles Conventions de Genève”, Minutes of Meetings, Legal Commission, 14 September 1949, ICRC Archives.
44 ICRC Commentary on the APs, above note 27, pp. xxv–xxvi.
45 ICRC, Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention: Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, 2nd ed., Geneva, 2020, paras 75–123, available at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/full/GCIII-commentary.
46 Jean-Marie Henckaerts and Elvina Pothelet, “The Interpretation of IHL Treaties: Subsequent Practice and Other Salient Issues”, in Heike Krieger and Jonas Püschmann (eds), Law-Making and Legitimacy in International Humanitarian Law, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2021, pp. 162–168.
47 For information on the ICRC Archives, see Valerie McKnight Hashemi, “A Balancing Act: The Revised Rules of Access to the ICRC Archives Reflect Multiple Stakes and Challenges”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 100, No. 907–909, 2018.
48 The six official UN languages are, in alphabetical order, Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. See UN, “Official Languages”, available at: www.un.org/en/our-work/official-languages.
49 For instance, the Review itself, which has made significant progress in diversifying authorship. See Cotter, Cédric and Policinski, Ellen, “A History of Violence: The Development of International Humanitarian Law Reflected in the International Review of the Red Cross”, Journal of International Humanitarian Legal Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2020CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Demeyere, Bruno, “Editorial: Emerging Voices: Increasing the Diversity of Voices Featured in the International Review of the Red Cross”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 102, No. 914, 2021, pp. 511–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
50 J.-M. Henckaerts, above note 36, p. 57.
51 Louis-Auguste Martin, Annuaire philosophique: Examen critique des travaux de physiologie, de métaphysique et de morale accomplis dans l'année, Vol. 7, Ladrange, Paris, 1870, pp. 357 –358.
52 ICRC Circular Fr563b, 16 March 1959, ICRC Archives, B AG 022 033.03.
53 1952 Commentary on GC I, above note 25, p. 8.
54 W. Hays Parks, “Pictet's Commentaries”, in Christophe Swinarski (ed.), Studies and Essays on International Humanitarian Law and Red Cross Principles in Honor of Jean Pictet, ICRC, Geneva, and Nijhoff, The Hague, 1984, p. 496. Hays Parks was then chief of international law in the Office of the Judge Advocate General of the US Army.
55 Schmitt, Michael N. and Watts, Sean, “State Opinio Juris and International Humanitarian Legal Pluralism”, International Law Studies, Vol. 91, No. 1, 2015, pp. 192–193Google Scholar.
56 See, e.g., Xiao, Mao, “Are ‘Unlawful Combatants’ Protected under International Humanitarian Law?”, Amsterdam Law Forum, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2018, pp. 65, 68Google Scholar, available at: https://amsterdamlawforum.org/articles/abstract/10.37974/ALF.321/; Londoño-Camargo, Tatiana, “The Scope of Application of International Humanitarian Law to Non-International Armed Conflicts”, Vniversitas, Vol. 64, No. 130, 2015, p. 210CrossRefGoogle Scholar, available at: https://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/vnijuri/article/view/13678; Aoláin, Fionnuala Ní, “Hamdan and Common Article 3: Did the Supreme Court Get It Right?”, University of Minnesota Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 5, 2007, p. 1539Google Scholar, available at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles/73/; Yan, Guanzhu, “Analysis of the Scope of ‘Protected Persons’ in the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949”, Human Rights, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2011, p. 9 fn. 5Google Scholar; Sipowo, Alain-Guy, “Does International Criminal Law Create Humanitarian Law Obligations? The Case of Exclusively Non-State Armed Conflict under the Rome Statute”, Canadian Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 51, No. 1, 2013, p. 292 fn. 12Google Scholar, available at: https://tinyurl.com/uyys3n45.
57 See, for example, International Court of Justice (ICJ), Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Separate Opinion of Judge Simma, 19 December 2005, ICJ Reports 2005, paras 26, 34, 39; ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece Intervening), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Cançado Trindade, 6 July 2010, ICJ Reports 2011, paras 137, 145, 148; International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Prosecutor v. Blaskić, Case No. IT-95-14, Decision on the Defence Motion to Strike Portions of the Amended Indictment Alleging “Failure to Punish” Liability (Trial Chamber), 4 April 1997, para. 4(d); ICTY, Prosecutor v. Aleksovoski, Case No. IT-95-14/1-A, Judgement (Appeals Chamber), 24 March 2000, paras 22, 26–27, 104; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Delalić, Case No. IT-96-21-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 20 February 2001, paras 31, 78–79, 96, 132, 143–149, 166, 233, 238, 250, 254–255, 327, 330, 416; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Vasiljević, Case No. IT-98-32-T, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 29 November 2002, paras 195, 203, 223; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 31 July 2003, para. 459; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Hadzihasanović and Kubura, Case No. IT-01-47-AR73.3, Decision on Joint Defence Interlocutory Appeal of Trial Chamber Decision on Rule 98bis Motions for Acquittal (Appeals Chamber), 11 March 2005, paras 17, 25; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Strugar, Case No. IT-01-42-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 17 July 2008, paras 167, 173, 176–178, 270, 286–287,298, 329; International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), Prosecutor v. Rutaganda, Case No. ICRT-96-3-T, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 6 December 1999, paras 92, 100; ICTR, Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 1 June 2001, paras 437, 441; ICTR, Prosecutor v. Semanza, Case No. ICTR-97-20-T, Judgment (Trial Chamber), 15 May 2003, paras 355, 357, 359, 363–364, 366–367; ICTR, Setako v. Prosecutor, Case No. ICTR-04-81-A, Judgment (Appeals Chamber), 28 September 2011, para. 260.
58 See, for example, US Supreme Court, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense et al., 126 S. Ct. 2749, 2764 (2006), Majority Opinion, Justice Thomas Dissenting and Justice Alito Dissenting, 2006; Republic of Colombia, Jurisdicción Especial Para La Paz, Salas de Justicia Sala de Reconocimiento de Verdad, de Responsabilidad y de Determinación de los Hechos y Conductas, Auto No. 19 of 2021, Bogotá, 26 January 2021.
59 See, for example, Human Rights Council, “There Is Nothing Left for Us”: Starvation as a Method of Warfare in South Sudan, UN Doc. A/HRC/45/CRP.3, 5 October 2020, paras 34, 37.
60 See, for example, International Criminal Court, The Prosecutor v. Bosco Ntaganda, Case No. ICC-01/04-02/06, Second Decision on the Defence's Challenge to the Jurisdiction of the Court in Respect of Counts 6 and 9 (Appeals Chamber), 17 January 2017, para. 50; Hosseinnejad, Katayoun and Askary, Pouria, “The Obligation to Exercise ‘Leniency’ in Penal and Disciplinary Measures against Prisoners of War in Light of the ICRC Updated Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 104, No. 919, 2022CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also the article by Antoon De Baets in this issue of the Review.
61 See ICRC, “Updated Commentaries Bring Fresh Insights on Continued Relevance of Geneva Conventions”, interview with Jean-Marie Henckaerts, 7 March 2016, available at: www.icrc.org/en/document/updated-commentaries-first-geneva-convention.
62 T. Wood, above note 33.
63 See Michael W. Meier, “The Updated GCIII Commentary: A Flawed Methodology?”, Articles of War, 3 February 2021, available at: https://lieber.westpoint.edu/updated-gciii-commentary-flawed-methodology/; Kevin Jon Heller, “First Thoughts from Academia on the Updated GCI Commentary”, OpinioJuris, 22 July 2016, available at: http://opiniojuris.org/2016/07/22/multi-blog-series-first-thoughts-on-the-updated-gci-commentary-from-academia/.
64 Eric Jensen and Carolyn Sharp, “Non-State Commentaries: Law-Making or Law-Suggesting?”, Articles of War, 8 April 2021, available at: https://lieber.westpoint.edu/non-state-commentaries-law-making-law-suggesting/.
65 Schmitt, Michael N. and Watts, Sean, “Common Article 1 and the Duty to ‘Ensure Respect’”, International Law Studies, Vol. 96, No. 1, 2020Google Scholar; Verity Robson, “Ensuring Respect for the Geneva Conventions: A More Common Approach to Article 1”, OpinioJuris, 17 July 2020, available at: http://opiniojuris.org/2020/07/17/ensuring-respect-for-the-geneva-conventions-a-more-common-approach-to-article-1/; Elizabeth Stubbins Bates, “Geneva Convention III Commentary: Unpacking the Potential of ‘Ensure Respect’ in Common Article 1”, Just Security, 30 October 2020, available at: www.justsecurity.org/73166/geneva-convention-iii-commentary-unpacking-the-potential-of-ensure-respect-in-common-article-1/.
66 See Diane Marie Amann, “Commenting on the ICRC Geneva Commentaries”, 15 March 2016, available at: https://dianemarieamann.com/2016/03/15/commenting-on-the-icrc-geneva-commentaries-30-march-in-d-c/; Eden Lapidor, “New Developments in ICRC Commentaries to the POW Convention”, Just Security, 18 June 2020, available at: www.justsecurity.org/70863/pow-geneva-convention-commentary-highlights-of-new-developments/; Keiichiro Okimoto, “The United Nations and the Third Geneva Convention”, EJIL: Talk!, 26 October 2020, available at: www.ejiltalk.org/the-united-nations-and-the-third-geneva-convention/. The project to update the ICRC Commentaries was also the subject of the 22nd edition of the Bruges Colloquium, an annual workshop co-hosted by the ICRC and the College of Europe that brings together legal practitioners from around Europe. See Colloquium's website, available at: www.coe-icrc.eu/en/programme.
67 ICRC, above note 33, at 4:15 (ICRC's translation).
68 Catherine O'Rourke, “Geneva Convention III Commentary: What Significance for Women's Rights?”, Just Security, 21 October 2020, available at: www.justsecurity.org/72958/geneva-convention-iii-commentary-what-significance-for-womens-rights/.
69 S. Hill, above note 33.
70 Nilendra Kumar, “‘An Important Document to Reiterate Obligations Under Third Geneva Convention’ – Maj Gen Nilendra Kumar”, ICRC New Delhi Blog, 15 June 2020, available at: https://blogs.icrc.org/new-delhi/2020/06/15/important-document-to-reiterate-the-obligations-under-geneva-conventions-maj-gen-nilendra-kumar/.
71 See C. Cotter and E. Policinski, above note 59, pp. 36–67.
72 See Mikhail Orkin, “In Bruges: The Enduring Relevance of IHL and the Updated Commentaries”, Humanitarian Law & Policy Blog, 23 February 2021, available at: https://blogs.icrc.org/law-and-policy/2022/02/23/bruges-ihl-commentaries/; Kelisiana Thynne, “GCIII Commentary Symposium: ‘Preparations Have been Made in Advance – GCIII and the Obligation to Respect and Ensure Respect by Preparing for Retaining POWS”, OpinioJuris, 27 January 2021, available at: http://opiniojuris.org/2021/01/27/gciii-commentary-symposium-preparations-have-been-made-in-advance-gciii-and-the-obligation-to-respect-and-ensure-respect-by-preparing-for-retaining-pows/; S. Hill, above note 33; K. Okimoto, above note 66.
73 Available at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl.
74 See ICRC, “IHL App 2.0: International Humanitarian Law and More in Your Pocket”, 1 October 2021, available at: www.icrc.org/en/document/ihl-digital-app.