^{page 64 note 1} Hereafter referred to as “ICRC”.

^{page 65 note 1} In its “Information Note” No. 5 of November 1954 (page 12), the ICRC already briefly examined the problem of arming Civil Defence units in time of war. The present consultation completes and details the opinions then expressed by the ICRC.

^{page 66 note 1} See for example Roux, Maxime: La protection civile, Paris 1959, pages 196 and following.Google Scholar

^{page 67 note 1} le Roy, R. Crince: “Le statut du Garde de secours en droit international”Google Scholar, Macht, De Vierde, (The Hague), 03 1959, page 37.Google Scholar

^{page 68 note 1} Civilians may take up arms to participate in a “mass rising” under the strict conditions of the Hague Regulations, but in this case they are no longer non-combatants and are thus liable to capture.

^{page 69 note 1} Waltzog, A.: Recht der Landskriegsführung, Berlin 1942, page 113 Google Scholar, quotes for example the case of the French territorial police force.

^{page 69 note 2} Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, of August 12, 1949 (II). Commentary published under the direction of Jean S. Pictet, ICRC, Geneva 1959 (p. 194–195 of the English text).

^{page 70 note 1} It should furthermore be remembered that the sick or wounded or property which the military medical staff may protect if necessary with armed force, are persons or property of which the respect is expresly required under the Geneva Convention; however, as mentioned above, the activity of the Civil Defence force is in some countries connected with safeguarding property such as industrial installations which could be considered as military objectives and which are under no circumstances protected by the international law of war.

^{page 72 note 1} This term includes spies who carry out destructive acts, although in general the true spy does not do so.

^{page 73 note 1} For example, par. 105 of the British Manual of Military Law (1958 edition) states (page 38):Google Scholar “Troops on hostile missions, whether conveyed to enemy or enemy-occupied territory by air, land or water, and airborne troops whether landed there by parachute, glider or ordinary aircraft, although operating by highly skilled methods of surprise and violent combat, are entitled, as long as they are members of the organized armed forces of the opposing belligerent and wear uniform, to be treated as regular combatants, even if they operate singly”.

In the commentary on this ruling, we find the following: “… troops landed by air or by other means behind the lines of the belligerent—whether in his own territory or in territory occupied by him—with a view to committing hostilities against his armed forces or other hostile acts, such as sabotage of lines of communication or of buildings and other objects of military importance …”.

^{page 73 note 2} The relief material of purely civilian Civil Defence organizations should actually be protected by Article 63 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. However, the application of this article to such material gives rise to various problems and it would be desirable to define it; this question is also being studied by the ICRC at present.

^{page 73 note 3} Baxter, R.: “So called unprivileged belligerency: spies, guerillas and saboteurs”, British Year Book of International Law, 1951.Google Scholar

^{page 74 note 1} See Trial, Skorzeny, Law Reports of Trial of War Criminals, London 1949, Vol. IX, page 90.Google Scholar

^{page 75 note 1} Final Record of the Diplomatic Conference of 1949, Vol. II A, pages 432–434, 480–481, 562.Google Scholar

^{page 75 note 2} Castren, F.: The present Law of War and Neutrality, Helsinki 1954, page 67.Google Scholar

^{page 75 note 3} Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, of August 1949 (II), Commentary published under the direction of Pictet, Jean S., ICRC, Geneva 1959, (p. 194–195 Google Scholar of the English text).