Defining “other situations of violence”

1. Introduction

In its institutional strategy for 2011-2014, the ICRC set forth its ambition to "more
systematically and effectively bring the humanitarian consequences of other situations of
violence within its scope of action" 1 in order to strengthen its response to the needs it seeks
to meet. Judging by a range of internal documents, 2 however, it seems that the concept of
"other situations of violence" (OSV) is understood in a variety of ways within the ICRC. This
lack of a shared definition has probably helped to fuel the concerns expressed in recent
months by some States 3 and National Societies 4 about what they see as an extension of the
ICRC's scope of action or as a lack of clarity about the complementary roles and mandates
of the respective components of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
As a result, we believe that it would be useful to define more precisely what is meant by
OSV.

2. Other situations of violence

The expression "other situations of violence" is not defined in law. It is used by the ICRC to
describe any situation of violence that does not reach the threshold of armed conflict and
therefore the point beyond which international humanitarian law (IHL) applies. Within the
organization, it is sometimes replaced by the term "infra-IHL."

1
To this end, the ICRC "will focus primarily on situations of organized armed violence in urban settings, State
repression or inter-community violence," ICRC Strategy 2011-2014.
2
See some recent examples in footnotes 33 and 35.
3
For example, during consultations on what to include in a resolution on “health care in danger,” the United
Kingdom stated that "this could be interpreted as an expansion of the application of International Humanitarian
Law (IHL) for instance making it applicable to, e.g. domestic law enforcement or a new classification of
violence which falls below the threshold for an international or a non-international armed conflict. Given the
ambiguity over what constitutes ‘other situations of violence’ we would wish to see this term removed from the
resolution," 31st International Conference, Health Care in Danger: Consultation on Possible Elements for a
Resolution. See also the comments made by France during the same consultations: "The wording proposed to
States, which moves towards extending the ICRC's mandate, is problematic. A more general discussion of these
‘other situations of violence’ could be initiated at a later date to enable States to express their views on the
topic." In the end, the reference to OSV was removed from the resolution on “health care in danger” at the
International Conference, even though States' comments had more to do with their recognition ot the role that the
ICRC should play in OSV than with a terminology issue.
4
For example, the Norwegian Red Cross declared that "as was stated by the Norwegian Red Cross at the
Council of Delegates in 2009 we were of the opinion then that the term ‘other situations of violence’ infers all
types of situations of violence. We can not see that the term has been further elaborated in the consultations
paper for the International Conference. We are therefore still not sure which situations ‘other situations of
violence’ refer to. Since different laws may apply and different actions should be taken depending on the context
of ‘other situations of violence’ we suggested that this term is elaborated in the resolution and/or in the
background paper. A possibility could be to use ‘similar situations of armed violence’ instead since we assume
that the intention is that ’other situations of violence’ are those with commensurate levels of victims or levels of
violence, but has not (yet) reached the level of armed conflicts. If this is the case we think that ‘Similar situations
of armed violence’ will better encapsulate the situations that the resolution is referring to,” Comments to
Elements for Proposed Resolution 31st International Conference of the Red Cross/Red Crescent: Health Care in
Danger," Norwegian Red Cross.

1
The expression "other situations of violence" should not be used on its own. It is only
meaningful if it accompanies the term "armed conflict." The word "other" hinges on a
reference point – armed conflict – which is by definition violent.

If we wish to mention OSV in isolation, we should talk about "situations of violence that have
not reached the threshold (or intensity) of an armed conflict" or "situations of violence other
than armed conflicts."

Situations of violence below the armed-conflict threshold are expressly excluded from the
scope of application of IHL. Some of these situations are mentioned in Article 1, paragraph 2,
of Additional Protocol II, which stipulates that the Protocol “shall not apply to situations of
internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence and
other acts of a similar nature, as not being armed conflicts." Since internal disturbances and
tensions are not the only situations of violence that do not reach the armed-conflict threshold,
we can infer that the concept of OSV also covers situations of violence that are less intense
than internal disturbances and tensions. 5

2.1. Internal disturbances

In 1971, the ICRC defined internal disturbances as follows:

"This involves situations in which there is no non-international armed conflict as such, but
there exists a confrontation within the country, which is characterized by a certain
seriousness or duration and which involves acts of violence. These latter can
assume various forms, all the way from the spontaneous generation of acts of revolt to
the struggle between more or less organized groups and the authorities in power. In
these situations, which do not necessarily degenerate into open struggle, the authorities
in power call upon extensive police forces, or even armed forces, to restore
internal order. The high number of victims has made necessary the application of a
minimum of humanitarian rules." 6

In 1992, some 20 years later, the ICRC gave a broader definition of internal disturbances
when drawing up Policy 4 on the phenomenon of internal violence. Henceforth, the
definition of internal disturbances no longer referred exclusively to a confrontation involving
the authorities in power. Internal disturbances could thus also take the form of confrontations
between different groups of individuals, none of which were in power:

"For a situation to be qualified as one of internal disturbances, it is of no consequence

whether State repression is involved or not, whether the disturbances are lasting,
brief with durable effects, or intermittent, whether only a part or all of the national
territory is affected or whether the disturbances are of religious, ethnic, political or any
other origin." 7 "They encompass, for example, riots by which individuals or groups
openly express their opposition, their discontent or their demands, or even isolated
and sporadic acts of violence. They may take the form of fighting between
different factions or against the power in place." 8 "The bloody nature of
confrontations is one indicator of a situation of internal disturbances, but not the only

5
See sections 2.3, 2.4 and 6 below.
6
Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, J.
Pictet et al, eds, ICRC/Martinus Nijhoff, Geneva, 1987, p. 1355, which cites the description of internal
disturbances given by the ICRC during the first session of the Conference of Government Experts held in 1971.
7
Policy 4, guideline 2.2.1 on the definition of internal disturbances; Marion Harroff-Tavel, “Action taken by the
International Committee of the Red Cross in situations of internal violence,” International Review of the Red
Cross, May-June 1993, No. 294, pp. 203-204.
8
Ibid.

2
 one. Mass arrests of people for their actions or opinions is another. Torture, forced
disappearance, summary executions, the setting up of special tribunals and the
suspension of fundamental judicial guarantees are other indicators of internal
disturbances." 9

Article 5.3.1 of the Seville Agreement provides that "[t]he ICRC will act as lead agency, as
provided for in Article 4 of the present Agreement, in situations of international and non-
international armed conflicts, internal strife and their direct results as referred to in Article 5.1,
Section A and in paragraphs a) and b), and in Section C (armed conflict concomitant with
natural or technological disasters)." To this end, the Seville Agreement defines disturbances
(or "strife") as follows:

"internal strife does not necessarily imply armed action but serious acts of violence
over a prolonged period or a latent situation of violence, whether of political, religious,
racial, social, economic or other origin, accompanied by one or more features such
as: mass arrests, forced disappearances, detention for security reasons, suspension
of judicial guarantees, declaration of state of emergency, declaration of martial law." 10

It should be noted that the term "internal disturbances" is used in Article 1 of Additional
Protocol II. Unfortunately, the term "internal disturbances" becomes "internal strife" in Article
5, paragraph 2(d), of the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, and in the Seville Agreement, leading to confusion about the meaning of these
two expressions. "Internal strife" and "internal disturbances" are in fact synonyms that
describe the same reality and correspond to the French term troubles intérieurs.

The situation in Syria in 2011 was a typical example of internal disturbances.

2.2. Internal tensions

Internal tensions are defined by the ICRC as follows:

"these could be said to include in particular situations of serious tension (political,
religious, racial, social, economic, etc.), but also the sequels of armed conflict or of
internal disturbances. Such situations have one or more of the following
characteristics, if not all at the same time:
 large scale arrests;
 a large number of ’political’ prisoners;
 the probable existence of ill-treatment or inhumane conditions of detention;
 the suspension of fundamental judicial guarantees, either as part of the
promulgation of a state of emergency or simply as a matter of fact;
 allegations of disappearances." 11

In 2011, Belarus, Madagascar, Uzbekistan and Zimbabwe were examples of situations of

internal tensions where the ICRC carried out or wished to carry out protection work.

"In short, […] there are internal disturbances, without being an armed conflict, when the
State uses armed force to maintain order; there are internal tensions, without being internal
disturbances, when force is used as a preventive measure to maintain respect for law and
order." 12 Although several of the definitions mentioned above seem to consider that

9
Study on the phenomenon of internal violence (annex to Policy 4), p. 24.
10
Article 5.2(b) of the Seville Agreement.
11
Commentary on the Additional Protocols, op. cit., p. 1355.
12
Commentary on the Additional Protocols, op. cit, p. 1355.

3
situations of internal disturbances and tensions only occur when States use force, we should
also include collective violence that is not necessarily related to action by the State. 13

2.3. Situations of violence that do not reach the level of internal disturbances and tensions

Since the terms "situation" and "violence" are so vague, many violent situations that do not
reach the threshold of internal disturbances or even of internal tensions could easily fall
under the heading of other situations of violence. The International Federation of Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies, for example, distinguishes between different types of violence
within its scope of action: 14 “self-directed violence” (aimed at oneself), 15 “interpersonal
violence” 16 and “community violence.” 17

Although there is no legal definition of OSV, the ICRC's daily experience makes it easy
to conclude that self-directed and interpersonal violence are not included within the
scope of this concept.

As for community violence, some of its manifestations come under internal disturbances and
tensions (such as the violence in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro), while others are less intense
and do not necessarily reach the threshold of internal tensions (such as violence between
groups of hooligans after a football match).

2.4. Types of situation covered by the concept of OSV

In light of the definitions above, we can conclude that OSV include all forms of collective
violence, i.e. internal disturbances and tensions and other types of community violence, even
when the latter are not intense enough to be internal tensions, provided that the violence has
major consequences in humanitarian terms. 18 OSV are therefore situations of collective
violence with significant humanitarian consequences that do not reach the threshold
of an armed conflict. Domestic violence (self-directed and interpersonal violence) is hence
excluded from the concept of OSV.

Collective violence is not necessarily organized; it involves several individuals

considered to make up a whole that is characterized by shared traits and behaviour, while
organized violence follows a methodical plan and unfolds according to a set of rules. To say
that OSV are equivalent to organized violence would therefore be overly simplistic.

3. Origin of OSV terminology

For several years, the ICRC has used various expressions similar to "other situations of
violence." This proliferation of closely related turns of phrase has added to the confusion

13
Policy 4, guideline 2.2.1, which defines internal disturbances, also specifies that they "may take the form of
fighting between different factions or against the power in place."
14
IFRC Strategy on Violence Prevention, Mitigation and Response, 2011-2020, p. 6.
15
"Self-directed violence refers to violence by an individual against oneself. It is subdivided into suicidal
behaviour and self-abuse. Suicidal behaviour includes suicidal thoughts, attempted suicides and completed
suicides. Self-abuse covers self-mutilation and substance abuse or misuse," ibid.
16
"Interpersonal violence is violence that occurs between individuals. Interpersonal violence occurs between
people who know each other; it can occur in homes, schools, workplaces and institutions. Examples include
child abuse, bullying and harassment, family violence, and abuse of the elderly," ibid.
17
"Community violence is a type of interpersonal violence, that takes place at the community level, (e.g.
in urban settings) between people who may or may not know one another. Common forms of community
violence include gang violence, violence by supporters of sports teams, mob attacks and sporadic crime," ibid.
18
See section 3.1 below.

4
about what is meant by OSV. It is therefore worth taking the time to look at these
"variations" 19 and to recall how they came about.

3.1. Situations of internal violence

The expression "situations of internal violence" comes from Policy 4 on the phenomenon of
internal violence, which deals with "the ICRC's response to humanitarian problems that arise
during a non-international armed conflict or internal disturbances, or that require it to take
action outside such situations." 20 The ICRC has therefore left the concept of internal
tensions out of this document "insofar as there is no longer a lower threshold of
violence below which the ICRC does not take action. The ICRC's response shall be
determined by whether its intrinsic qualities can offer a solution to a humanitarian problem." 21

Policy 4 uses the term "situations of internal violence" or "internal violence" to cover all
situations that could require an ICRC response but do not necessarily reach the threshold of
a non-international armed conflict or that of internal disturbances or tensions. The purpose of
using this terminology is to refrain from relying on criteria to classify situations, at least when
they have not reached the armed-conflict threshold. Instead, the idea is to examine on a
case-by-case basis whether action by a specifically neutral and independent organization
could help to resolve a humanitarian issue. 22

3.2. Other situations of internal violence

The concept of "other situations of internal violence" was introduced by DC_JUR_OP in the
classification table produced every year since 1997 and turned into a database in 2005. This
database covers all situations given a legal classification by the ICRC because the
organization carries out, or wishes to carry out, protection work there (detention-related
activities and protection of the civilian population), in accordance with its treaty-based or
statutory mandate. These situations therefore include international armed conflicts,
internationalized internal armed conflicts, 23 non-international armed conflicts, internal
disturbances and other situations of internal violence.

The presence of the adjective "other" in the expression "other situations of violence" is
explained by the fact that violence is by definition a characteristic of every situation in which
the ICRC carries out protection work, particularly armed conflicts. 24 It would therefore be
incongruous to talk about "armed conflicts and situations of violence," as this would imply
that armed conflicts are not violent. This is why the 1998 definition of the ICRC's mission,

19
For a non-exhaustive list, the following acronyms have been – and in some case continue to be – used: OSIV
(other situations of internal violence), OSAV (other situations of armed violence), OSOV (other situations of
violence), SOTAC (situations other than armed conflict).
20
This policy was adopted by the Assembly on 4 and 5 November 1992 and is among those needing to be
revised (in French only).
21
Study on the phenomenon of internal violence (annex to Policy 4), p. 20.
22
Ibid., p. 28.
23
These are either international armed conflicts, non-international armed conflicts, or both at the same time. See
revision under way (November 2011) of Policy 42 on the implementation of IHL in internationalized internal
armed conflicts (in French only).
24
Admittedly, armed violence is not required to trigger an international armed conflict; the Pictet Commentary
states that "it suffices for the armed forces of one Power to have captured adversaries falling within the scope of
Article 4 [of the Third Geneva Convention]. Even if there has been no fighting, the fact that persons covered by
the Convention are detained is sufficient for its application. The number of persons captured in such
circumstances is, of course, immaterial," J.S. Pictet, ed., Commentary: III Geneva Convention Relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War, ICRC, Geneva, 1960, p. 23. Nevertheless, we should bear in mind that when one
State captures members of the armed forces of another State, this is a form of violence, regardless of the
conditions in which the captives are held.

5
which referred to "war and internal violence," was inappropriate and was amended during the
2008 revision. 25

The presence of the adjective "internal" in the expression "other situations of internal
violence" is explained by the range of situations in which the ICRC has a mandate, whether
treaty-based or statutory. These situations cover armed conflicts (international or non-
international), internal disturbances and other situations of internal violence. The word
"internal" was therefore used to explain the fact that, alongside international situations of
violence (IAC), there were also non-international situations of violence, such as non-
international armed conflicts, internal disturbances and other non-international situations
whose level of violence did not reach that of internal disturbances. For several years, many
ICRC documents therefore used the expression "internal disturbances and other situations of
internal violence" to define all situations that had not reached the armed-conflict threshold. 26

The distinction between situations of internal disturbances and other situations of internal
violence has its origins in Article 5 of the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red
Crescent Movement (Article 5, paragraph 2(d), for internal disturbances ("strife") and Article
5, paragraph 3, for other situations). However, this distinction has no legal implications
because IHL does not apply in these two types of situation. Furthermore, this distinction has
no operational repercussions as the ICRC's conditions for engagement are not directly linked
to the degree to which order is disrupted in a country. Since this distinction has no
repercussions in terms of the law, 27 policy or operations, in January 2007 a decision was
taken to drop it from the classification table and to use "other situations of violence" to
describe all violent situations that had not reached the armed-conflict threshold.

The adjective "internal" was no longer required because the ICRC's mandate no longer
referred to "internal disturbances" but was considered instead to refer to armed conflicts and
other situations of violence (which encompass internal disturbances). Indeed, saying that the
ICRC had a mandate in armed conflicts and other situations of internal violence would have
given the impression that its mandate excluded international conflicts. That ambiguity
disappeared when the word "internal" was removed.

Doing away with the word "internal" was all the more justified as some situations of violence
that do not reach the intensity of an armed conflict acquire a transnational dimension
because they spill over a State's international borders. It would have been inappropriate for
the expression "other situations of internal violence" to be used to describe situations
unfolding on either side of an international border.

3.3. Other situations of armed violence

At the 28th International Conference in 2003, one of the four humanitarian issues addressed
by the Agenda for Humanitarian Action was that of missing persons. This issue made
reference, 10 times, to "other situations of armed violence." 28 This terminology was used
again at the 30th International Conference in 2007. 29

25
See section 3.5 below.
26
By way of example, Policy 15 on action by the ICRC in the event of violations of IHL or of other
fundamental rules protecting persons in situations of violence, adopted in 2005 (in French only), refers several
times to "internal disturbances and other situations of internal violence," particularly in the section about the
Policy's scope of application.
27
With the exception of the Seville Agreement, which stipulates that the ICRC will act as lead agency in
situations of internal disturbances ("strife") and their direct results.
28
Resolution 1, "Adoption of the Declaration and Agenda for Humanitarian Action."
29
Resolution 1, "Together for Humanity."

6
3.4. Other situations of collective (armed) violence

When the International Review of the Red Cross (which is published by the ICRC) was
redesigned in 1999, it described itself as "a forum for thought, analysis and dialogue on
humanitarian issues in armed conflict and other situations of collective violence." When a
new format was introduced in 2005, the adjective "armed" was added and the Review stated
that its aim was "to promote reflection on humanitarian law, policy and action in armed
conflict and other situations of collective armed violence."

3.5. Other situations of violence

From the beginning of 2007, ICRC legal documents mostly used "other situations of violence"
to talk about the ICRC's scope of action in non-conflict situations and/or its statutory
mandate.

At the request of the Assembly, 30 during its meeting on 3 June 2008 the Directorate
approved the revised version of the definition of the ICRC's mission, in which the
expression "victims of war and internal violence" was replaced by "victims of armed conflict
and other situations of violence." 31

Since then, the expression "other situations of violence" has been widely used throughout the
ICRC 32 but is not always interpreted in the same way. In some cases, OSV are described as
being restricted to situations of organized armed violence in urban settings, State repression

30
At its meeting on 23-24 April 2008, the Assembly pointed out "a slight problem of logic in the definition of
the ICRC's mission as established in 1998. The first paragraph of that definition refers to ’victims of war and
internal violence,’ which logically excludes the possibility of internal violence taking the form of a non-
international armed conflict. The expression ‘victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence,’ used
elsewhere in this draft policy, is more satisfactory."
31
See Policy 1 on the ICRC, its mission and its work, where the ICRC defines its mission as follows: "The
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is an impartial, neutral and independent organization whose
exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed conflict and other
situations of violence and to provide them with assistance."
32
E.g. in the ICRC Strategy 2011-2014, in draft resolutions prepared for the 31st International Conference in
2011, and in speeches made at the United Nations, both before the General Assembly and before the Security
Council.

7
or intercommunal violence, 33 although the ICRC Strategy 2011-2014 does not rule out other
types of OSV. 34 In other cases, a broader definition is given. 35

4. The ICRC's mandate in OSV

33
To give a few recent examples: Minutes of the meeting of 23 September 2011 between the Director of
Operations and the French Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs: "The rationale is clear cut. The ICRC has,
based on its statutory right of initiative, the possibility to offer its services in situations falling below the
threshold of IHL applicability. PKR described the three categories considered by the ICRC under this heading: i)
Repression by the State: this type of situations has seen ICRC engagement for decades, including Chile under
Pinochet in the 1970s and Syria today. PKR underlined that if this role was questioned it would mean concretely
no ICRC response in Syria today, no prison work in Zimbabwe, Myanmar or Ethiopia, etc., ii) inter-communal
violence: again a type of situation that has seen the ICRC be very active for decades: South Sudan, (…), etc. The
ICRC understands that in such situations the burden of proof is bigger on it to demonstrate its added-value, but
states and donors have long recognized (at international conferences) and funded ICRC activities in such
situations. PKR invited DV to look at past IC resolutions as confirmations thereof. iii) Therefore, there really
only was a third category that can be described as new and this is the ICRC work in situations of violence in
urban settings. Here PKR noted the ICRC strong belief that these situations may well become very serious
challenges for the international community in the future. The ICRC is looking at a specific set of contexts, in
which there are organized armed violence opposing state and gangs, with very significant consequences in
humanitarian terms." Minutes of the Directorate meeting of 27 September 11: "The ICRC distinguishes between
three types of other situations of violence: situations of State repression, intercommunal violence and urban
violence."
34
"The ICRC will also more systematically and effectively bring the humanitarian consequences of other
situations of violence within its scope of action. It will focus primarily on situations of organized armed violence
in urban settings, State repression or inter-community violence."
35
To give a few recent examples: Council of Delegates 2011 (background report): National Societies Preparing
for and Responding to Armed Conflict and Other Situations of Violence, provisional item No. 6, Glossary: "This
description reflects the ICRC’s perspective, in which it is important to define violence in relation to a legal
framework and in association with its mandate. In its mission statement, the ICRC refers to ’other situations of
violence.’ While the ICRC mainly operates in situations of armed conflict, it also responds to the growing
occurrence of violence that, while not reaching the threshold of armed conflict in terms of intensity, results in
humanitarian consequences which can be as serious as (or sometimes even more serious than) those stemming
from armed conflicts. These situations may be isolated, sporadic, chronic, recurrent, expected or unexpected and
may involve both State and non-State actors. Other situations of violence may refer to internal disturbances and
tensions such as civil unrest, riots, State repression, electoral violence, communal violence, organized urban
violence (such as between gangs) or demonstrations, as well as other acts of a similar nature. National Societies
and the ICRC, either alone or as primary partners, respond when there are serious humanitarian consequences
and where their expertise and mandates, together with their respective abilities to act in adherence to the
Fundamental Principles of neutrality, impartiality, and independence, represent an added value in assisting and
protecting vulnerable people. This is always done with the approval of the State in question." Also, 31st
International Conference, draft resolution on “health care in danger”: "The ICRC operates mainly in armed
conflict and often together with National Societies. They also respond to needs stemming from ’other situations
of violence’ that, while not reaching the threshold of armed conflict, can have serious humanitarian
consequences. In these situations, States have recognized that the ICRC ‘may take any humanitarian initiative
which comes within its role as a specifically neutral and independent institution and intermediary’ in conformity
with Article 5 of the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (adopted by the
Twenty-fifth International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in Geneva in October 1986 and
amended by the Twenty-sixth International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in December 1995).
In such situations, the ICRC takes action only with the full knowledge and consent of the State concerned." See
footnote 3 above about the removal of the concept of OSV from the resolution of the International Conference
on “health care in danger.” Some National Societies were opposed to the replacement of OSV by a narrower
term, such as internal disturbances. Those National Societies had a much broader understanding of OSV than the
ICRC, insofar as they believed that the term OSV also covered the National Societies' mandate to "give
assistance for victims of armed conflicts, as provided in the Geneva Conventions, and for victims of natural
disasters and other emergencies" (Article 3, paragraph 3, of the Statutes of the Movement).

8
In situations that have not reached the level of intensity of an armed conflict, the ICRC's
mandate is mainly based on the Statutes of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, especially Article 5.

Article 5, paragraph 2(d), of the Statutes of the Movement stipulates that one of the ICRC's
roles is "to endeavour at all times – as a neutral institution whose humanitarian work is
carried out particularly in time of international and other armed conflicts or internal strife – to
ensure the protection of and assistance to military and civilian victims of such events and of
their direct results."

Article 5, paragraph 3, of the Statutes of the Movement stipulates that the ICRC "may take
any humanitarian initiative which comes within its role as a specifically neutral and
independent institution and intermediary, and may consider any question requiring
examination by such an institution." This provision is so general that it gives the ICRC a
mandate to take action in connection not only with internal tensions but also with any
situation, whether violent or not, where people are in need of assistance or protection and
where the ICRC's know-how and added value could make a useful contribution. This is the
case, for example, with the ICRC's activities to restore family links following a natural or
technological disaster. 36 Another example is the offer of its services to 11 Western countries
on the basis of the ICRC's statutory mandate (conferred by Article 5, paragraph 3, of the
Statutes of the Movement), when those countries are not facing a situation of violence.

While we can therefore conclude that the ICRC's mandate in OSV is based on Article 5 of the
Statutes of the Movement, it would be wrong to assert that every situation that comes under
said Article 5 is an OSV. This provision (particularly paragraph 3) also covers situations that
do not reach the level of OSV, in other words situations that are not violent but where the
ICRC can offer assistance in its capacity as a specifically neutral and independent
organization.

5. The ICRC's scope of action and its conditions for engagement in OSV

The ICRC's presence in OSV is nothing new; the organization has been working in such
situations for many years. At the end of 2010, the ICRC listed 90 OSV where it was carrying
out or wished to carry out protection work. 37

To set its conditions for engagement in situations other than international armed conflicts, the
ICRC drew up Policy 4 in 1992.

Guideline 2.2 of this Policy states that: "If it is suspected that internal disturbances are
taking place in a country, the ICRC will systematically study the situation in order to classify
it. In principle, the ICRC will offer its services if called for by severe humanitarian needs that
are not being met and by the urgency of the situation."

Guideline 2.3 of Policy 4 states that: "In situations other than non-international armed
conflicts or internal disturbances, the ICRC will offer assistance:

1. if there is a high number of "victims," or if the ICRC believes that it alone is

capable of easing the tensions in a given situation, or is best placed to do so;

36
See page 52 of the brochure Restoring Family Links Strategy, Including Legal References, (February 2009).
37
See the summary tables in the database of legal classifications of situations where the ICRC carries out or
would like to carry out protection work, section 01.03.

9
 2. if an in-depth examination of the humanitarian needs arising in a given situation
leads the ICRC to consider, on the basis of the conditions listed below, that it
would be appropriate to offer its assistance.

 Conditions for choosing whether to make use of its right of initiative:

 the severity of the humanitarian needs not being met and the urgency of the
required response;

 the interest of the persons whose humanitarian needs are being considered;

 the advantage offered by the ICRC's neutrality and independence in order to

successfully carry out the activities being envisaged;

 whether offering assistance would have positive or negative repercussions for

any work under way;

 the fear that the situation will deteriorate.

 In addition to these conditions, all humanitarian in nature, there are considerations of

opportunity:

 whether the ICRC has received a request for assistance;

 the precedent that might be set by the ICRC's action;

 the need for a regional approach.

 The chances of success of an offer of assistance based on the ICRC’s right of

initiative should not be a decision-making factor if the offer is justified for humanitarian
reasons." 38

Although the ICRC's presence in OSV is nothing new, the ICRC aims to "more systematically
and effectively bring the humanitarian consequences of other situations of violence within its
scope of action" by focusing "primarily on situations of organized armed violence in urban
settings, State repression or inter-community violence. The organization will engage in each
new context in light of its potential added value. This will require it to adapt its knowledge of

38
The framework "ICRC engagement in ‘other situations of violence’: State of reflection on the subject" of May
2010 also set forth the following conditions for engagement: "After careful review and consideration of various
possible criteria, we arrived at the conclusion that there are only two features which have to be clearly present
for the ICRC to consider engaging operationally in OSV:
1) Humanitarian consequences resulting from
2) events of organized (armed) violence.
If these two features are present, the following factors should help to decide about engagement
1. Conviction that an ICRC intervention represents a clear added value to the people affected (i.e.
possibilities of access to the people affected, capacity to access and influence a wide range of actors
involved, capacity to mobilize coverage of needs by other actors, only actor able to respond rapidly)
2. Presence of an ICRC delegation and expectations from the population, the NS or the authorities
3. Existence of an armed conflict in the same country (concomitance)
4. Potential of re-occurrence of same events with same consequences in a not too-distant future
5. Existence (or not) of mechanisms at national level able to prevent human rights abuses to occur.
6. Identity of the delegation in the context, regional coherence and predictability."
At its meeting on 18 May 2010, the Directorate decided that this document would not replace Policy 4, which
remained the ICRC's reference for conditions for engagement, but that it would contribute to the revision of
Policy 4, scheduled for 2011 (DIR 1548).

10
various bodies of law, such as human rights law, to the expected operational needs in certain
specific domains (e.g. arrest, detention, and use of force)." 39

That being the case, it is important to understand that the concept of OSV as a whole is
broader that the categories of OSV given priority by the ICRC and to which the ICRC
responds on the basis of its conditions for engagement.

6. Summary

The difficulty with defining the term "other situations of violence" arises from the fact that it is
sometimes seen as at once giving a legal classification to a particular situation, establishing
the scope of the ICRC's mandate in that situation, and conveying the operational choices of
the ICRC in situations that have not reached the intensity of a non-international armed
conflict.

We should therefore bear in mind that the mandate conferred by Article 5, paragraph 3, of
the Statutes of the Movement is broader than the concept of OSV, which is in turn broader
than the OSV in which the ICRC wants to step up its work by focusing primarily "on situations
of organized armed violence in urban settings, State repression or inter-community violence"
(see diagram below). The fact that the ICRC often restricts its description of OSV, both
internally 40 and externally, 41 to those three categories, without specifying that they are
priorities for the ICRC, but that there are nevertheless other categories of OSV in which the
ICRC does not wish to get involved, also hinders a shared understanding of the term "other
situations of violence."

As indicated in sections 2.3, 2.4 and 3.1 above, OSV are situations of violence with the
following characteristics:

 The threshold of a non-international armed conflict has not been reached, either
because the violence is not sufficiently intense, or because those involved in this
violence are not sufficiently organized.

 Domestic violence does not come within the scope of OSV, as the violence must be
collective. 42

 This collective violence must have significant consequences in humanitarian terms.

To sum up, OSV are situations in which violence is engaged in collectively with
significant humanitarian consequences but does not reach the armed-conflict
threshold. OSV include internal disturbances, internal tensions and other forms of
communal violence, even when the latter are not as intense as internal tensions. 43

39
ICRC Strategy 2011-2014, p. 6.
40
For example, the minutes of the Directorate meeting of 27 September 2011 state that "[t]he ICRC
distinguishes between three types of other situations of violence: situations of State repression, intercommunal
violence and urban violence."
41
Such as in the minutes of the meeting of 23 September 2011 mentioned in footnote 33.
42
Collective violence is not necessarily organized (see section 2.4 above).
43
Such as violence between groups of hooligans after a football match, which can have major humanitarian
consequences.

11
Domestic violence is hence excluded from the concept of OSV. 44 The ICRC’s conditions for
engagement determine the OSV in which the ICRC will offer its services. 45

Since the concept of OSV aims to encompass a whole host of violent situations with
very different characteristics whose only shared features are that they do not reach
the intensity of an armed conflict, that they have major humanitarian consequences
and that they are the result of collective violence, it is probably not possible, or even
desirable, to further narrow down the definition of OSV. Otherwise, this might hamper
the flexibility the ICRC needs in order to offer assistance in situations in which the
action of a specifically neutral and independent organization can help to resolve a
humanitarian issue.

In all such cases, the ICRC's mandate is based on Article 5 of the Statutes of the
Movement.

Article 5 of the
Statutes of the
Movement

OSV

ICRC's
operational
choices in
OSV

7. Explaining the concept of OSV to outside actors

The negative reactions encountered in recent months from some States and National
Societies stem from a variety of causes. The reluctance expressed may be due to: a
perceived lack of clarity by the ICRC; a desire by States to safeguard their sovereignty and to
confine the ICRC to armed conflicts by refusing to grant it legitimacy to act in OSV
(especially when the ICRC seeks to engage in dialogue with non-State actors); States' fear
that the ICRC wishes to extend its scope of action (rather than simply consolidating its work
in a field in which it has already been operating for decades); the concerns of donors who

44
Domestic violence refers to self-directed violence and interpersonal violence (see footnotes 15 and 16).
45
In accordance with the conditions listed in section 5 above. That being the case, the example given in footnote
43 (violence between groups of hooligans) would not usually be among the situations to which the ICRC would
respond, since it does not meet the conditions for engagement.

12
take issue with the ICRC's neutral, independent and impartial humanitarian action or fear that
the ICRC's activities will become too dispersed.

It is therefore important to explain to these interlocutors that:

(a) The purpose is not to extend the ICRC's scope of action, but rather to clarify and raise
awareness of the organization’s work in situations in which it has been operating for a long
time or which are of concern to the ICRC because of the changing nature of situations of
violence.

(b) This clarification is nothing more than the implementation of conditions for engagement
that enable the ICRC to respond to the serious humanitarian consequences of situations that
are not new but that are gaining ground in various contexts – a trend that is likely to continue.

(c) The ICRC has been entrusted by the community of States with a mandate to offer
assistance in such situations under Article 5 of the Statutes of the Movement.

(d) The ICRC's work in such situations can only proceed with the agreement of the State in
question.

(e) It is the major humanitarian consequences of OSV that call for a response by an
organization like the ICRC that can make a real difference to the people affected by such
situations.

(f) The ICRC will not take action in OSV if it cannot do more than is already being done.

(g) Consideration should also be given to the preventive dimension of the ICRC's work in
OSV. Such situations sometimes degenerate into armed conflicts; it would be senseless for a
humanitarian organization like the ICRC to wait for the situation to deteriorate further before
offering its assistance.

(h) The ICRC's emphasis 46 on three categories of OSV (State repression, intercommunal
violence and organized armed violence in urban settings) is a choice made by the
organization and should not be seen to restrict its mandate in other OSV under Article 5 of
the Statutes of the Movement. These three categories of OSV all entail collective violence
with significant humanitarian consequences.

(i). OSV include internal disturbances and tensions which are defined in the Commentary on
the Additional Protocols (Article 1, paragraph 2, of Protocol II).

(j) The ICRC has been referring to OSV for many years (in a speech before the United
Nations General Assembly in 1997, then more systematically since 2005 in various speeches
before the General Assembly and the Security Council, in the public definition of the ICRC's
mission since 2008, in the ICRC Strategy 2011-2014, etc.).

Any other argument to persuade those displaying reluctance will be most welcome, bearing
in mind that the ICRC's position will have to be adapted in order to respond to the concerns
they express.

Laurent Colassis
DC_JUR_CHF
01.06.2012

46
The ICRC "will focus primarily" (ICRC Strategy 2011-2014, p. 6).

13