Jean Pictet, a former Vice-President of the ICRC, is one of the chief architects of modern international humanitarian law. In an article entitled “The formation of international humanitarian law” and published (in English) in the Review (No. 244, January-February 1985, pp. 3–24), Pictet analysed the ideas and forces which led to the successful negotiation and adoption of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949.

At the outbreak of the Second World War, international humanitarian law was made up of the various Hague Conventions of 1907 and the two 1929 Geneva Conventions, none of which dealt in a satisfactory manner with the risks faced by the civilian population. Experience during the war made a major revision of international humanitarian law a priority after 1945. This article traces the history of that endeavour up to the adoption by a diplomatic conference, on 12 August 1949, of the four Geneva Conventions for the Protection of War Victims. Particular emphasis is laid on the link between the ICRC's wartime experience with the inadequate law of the day and the negotiations for new legal provisions. The second part of the article identifies the major advances represented by the 1949 Geneva Conventions, one of the more important being the fact that the law's scope was extended to non-international armed conflicts. Though making no claim to perfection, the new Geneva Conventions nevertheless laid a sound basis on which adequate solutions may be found when military considerations and humanitarian exigencies clash.

It is obvious that adopting the Geneva Conventions of 1949 did not put an end to tragedy in war time. Although there is clearly no reason to rejoice, this anniversary presents an opportunity to reflect on what the Conventions have achieved. After a brief discussion of the circumstances under which they were adopted in the following the Second World War, the author points out the great impact of those treaties on the conduct of parties to armed conflict in the last fifty years. Moreover, the 1949 Conventions have provided a solid basis for further development of international humanitarian law, both in the form of treaties (such as the 1977 Additional Protocols) and practice. A number of issues are identified which, today, ought to be examined in the search for fresh solutions. They include the law applicable in non-international armed conflict, the rules on the conduct of hostilities, the question of nuclear weapons and international humanitarian law, simpler procedures for adopting prohibitions or restrictions on the use of new conventional weapons, and the applicability of humanitarian law to armed forces acting under UN auspices. The article concludes with an appeal to respect the fundamental values embodied in international humanitarian law. Appart from anything else, respecting those values in times of armed conflict facilitates a return to peace.

In the author's view the state of international humanitarian law as we approach the 21st century may be characterized by two major developments. The first is the trend away from well-structured conflicts between States and towards chaotic violence within the territory of the classic State entity. The second is the growing tendency to target civilians. The result is an increase in suffering and casualties among the civilian population. After considering the major obstacles to humanitarian action in present-day conflicts, the author looks at what she calls “the remarkable development of the international rules governing non-international armed conflicts”. She discusses ways of strengthening and developing standards applicable to such conflict other than formal codification of new rules. The paper finishes by stressing the decisive importance of making the law known among those who need to know it, particularly those engaged in violence.

The then-President of the ICRC, Gustave Moynier, welcomed the initiative taken by Czar Nicholas II to convene a conference to discuss a large number of proposals to ensure peace in Europe. This conference became to be known as the (First) International Peace Conference (The Hague, 1899). While Moynier did not expect very much from a debate on “abolishing war altogether”, he expected the Conference to bolster the work started in Geneva in 1864, in particular by adopting an extension to maritime warfare of the 1864 Convention. He nevertheless did everything possible to prevent the Hague Conference from taking upon itself an amendment of the 1864 Convention, which he considered to be a matter for a special meeting to be held under the aegis of “Geneva”. In the end, the Conference was unable to make substantial progress on the issues which it considered to be most important, in particular disarmament. It did, however, adopt an initial version of what was to become, in 1907, the Hague Regulations on land warfare, as well as the suggested text on maritime warfare. The ICRC was not represented at the Conference, as for reasons of poor health Gustave Moynier was unable to attend. Édouard Odier, another member of the ICRC, did take part in the Conference, but as a member of the Swiss delegation.

Only three years after the 1864 Convention — historically the “first” Geneva Convention — was adopted, proposals were made to amend the text by introducing provisions on the National Red Cross Societies. However, the result of this procedure — the 1868 Additional Articles — was never ratified by any of the parties to the original treaty. In the years that followed, no less than five proposals were circulated by the ICRC, none of which led to new treaty provisions until, in 1906, the States adopted a new Convention to replace the original 1864 treaty. Although the proposed texts originated in Geneva — drafted by General Dufour and Gustave Moynier — the ICRC remained sceptical about the wisdom of amending the original Convention. The fear of losing what had been gained in 1864 was stronger than the expectation that new progress would be made in protecting war victims. In an annex to this article the various drafts are published for the first time.

The Second World War was responsible for the death and disappearance of millions of Germans. Soon after the outbreak of hostilities the German Red Cross set up a tracing service in accordance with the 1929 Geneva Convention on prisoners of war. During the war, the tracing activity of the German Red Cross was expanded to include the search for civilian victims of the conflict. This article examines the activities of the tracing service both during the war and after it was over: restoring links between members of families, searching for lost children, establishing contact with prisoners, determining the whereabouts of displaced persons, etc. With the end of the Cold War, German reunification and a new relationship with Russia made it possible for the German Red Cross Society to intensify its search for missing persons.

Suite à l'annonce de Javier Solaria, secrétaire général de l'Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord (OTAN), qui autorise une action militaire contre la République fédérale de Yougoslavie, le Comité international de la Croix-Rouge (CICR) a envoyé le 24 mars 1999 une note verbale à l'OTAN et aux États membres concernés, ainsi qu'aux autorités yougoslaves, pour leur rappeler leurs obligations découlant du droit international humanitaire et en particulier des quatre Conventions de Genève de 1949.

In view of the announcement by Javier Solana, Secretary-General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), authorizing military action against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on 24 March 1999 sent a diplomatic note to NATO and the respective member States, as well as to the Yugoslav authorities, reminding them of their obligations under international humanitarian law, in particular the four Geneva Conventions of 1949.

Le Comité international de la Croix-Rouge a réaffirmé sa politique de «porte ouverte» pour les chercheurs qui s'intéressent au rôle de l'institution pendant et après la Seconde Guerre mondiale, les médias ayant à nouveau fait état d'informations selon lesquelles le criminel de guerre nazi Josef Mengele, a amené par tromperie le CICR à lui délivrer un document de voyage.

La République du Kenya a adhéré sans faire de déclaration ni de réserve, le 23 février 1999, aux Protocoles additionnels aux Conventions de Genève du 12 août 1949 relatifs à la protection des victimes des conflits armés internationaux (Protocole I) et non internationaux (Protocole II), adoptés à Genève le 8 juin 1977.

The Republic of Kenya acceded on 23 February 1999, without making any declaration or reservation, to the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), adopted in Geneva on 8 June 1977.

Le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'lrlande du Nord, par déclaration du 17 mai 1999, a reconnu la compétence de la Commission internationale d'établissement des faits, conformément à l'article 90 du Protocole additionnel aux Conventions de Genève du 12 août 1949 relatif à la protection des victimes des conflits armés internationaux (Protocole I).