STATEMENT OF FACTS

Alphon is an independent state which was once a constituent republic, together with
Bethuis and Citrea, of the Federal Republic of Citrea. Its population is predominantly comprised
of Alphonians who are accorded preferential treatment over ethnic Bethuisians, the latter
representing the minority. Most Bethuisians in Alphon live in Kebia, a province on the
southeastern part. Kebia is generally lagging behind in terms of economic development despite
the flourishing of Alphons overall economy primarily attributed to its successful high-tech
industry. Economic and social disparities roused the resentment of the ethnic Bethuisians against
the Alphonian government.
In 2007, vast deposits of a rare metal important in the high-tech industry were discovered
in Kebia. Bethuisians in Kebia doubted that they stood to benefit from the exploitation of the
material, stirring more opposition among them. Thus, the Bethuisian Peoples Movement (BPM),
founded by Neil Bing, gained support in Kebia. Bing asserted in an interview with the local
television that Kebias future belonged to the ethnic Bethuisians and that they would not allow
the Alphonian government to exploit Kebias resources at their expense.
Bing also formed a paramilitary group called the Democratic Kebian Front (DKF). The
members of the DKF were trained by Ventures, a multinational security and military company
hired by Bing. The trainings took place in some isolated areas in Kebia.
In June 2008, the BPM organized successive mass demonstrations which were pacified
by the Alphonian government. By the end of June, the situation only grew more volatile and
violent. Alphon declared the province of Kebia under a state of emergency and dispatched AAF
units under the command of General Arthur Reed. Such emergency decree allowed the military
commander to order the arrest and detention of persons deemed to present security threats.
On July 5, 2008, Bing declared that they were prepared to endure a long and difficult
struggle for freedom. On the same day, the DKF took over local government buildings and
attacked military compounds in the eastern part of Kebia and in Kiesh, its main city. Thus, Kiesh
served as the main control, communication, and logistical center for the Bethuisian forces.
Although troops were sent from the Peoples Army of Bethuis (PAB), it remained under the

separate command of Col. Ian Rose. Car bombings had also taken place in areas in Kebia which
remained under AAF control, resulting to some civilian casualties, as well as death and injury of
a great number of AAF soldiers.
In response to these advances, the Alphonian government approved Operation
Thunderstorm and appointed Reed in charge over the same. A meeting to plan the operation was
set among military staff including Defense Minister Tom Atom, Head of National Intelligence
Agency (NIA) Perry Ash, Reed himself, and his deputy Col. Harvey Simms. The general
agreement was to recapture Kiesh as utmost priority. The use of artillery attacks and air strikes
was also arranged primarily to shock, disorient and disrupt the Bethuisians.
In February 2009, the PAB directed artillery attacks against a Kebian town called Rica,
killing and injuring numerous civilians in the area. Alphon expressed its indignation, stating that
the government would reserve all possible means to react to such atrocities. Even the major
Alphonian media responded to the violence and called for blood for blood. Hence, the
following day, Operation Thunderstorm convened where Reed stressed that the situation has
become pressing and there was a need to react.
Atom expressed his concern over possible civilian damage but Reed maintained that such
collateral damage could not be avoided considering the present circumstances. Ash discussed the
indications that civilians in Kiesh were starting to take refuge in the countryside and that there
was already an enforced curfew which prevented all movement in the city from ten in the
evening to six in the morning.
Thereafter, Reed approved a list of targets for the planned attacks with their
corresponding detailed coordinates. There were several targets in the city of Kiesh including the
command center of the Bethuisian forces, the army barracks, the main communication center,
Bings residence and the BAS Factory which was known to produce explosive devices, even
prior to 2007. The specific coordinates supplied were derived from the records of the Alphonian
authorities, information collected by the surveillance drones, and reports of informants in Kiesh.
The location and residence of Neil Bing was closely monitored, as well.
The planned offensives were implemented on July 17 and 18, 2009. The artillery spots
were established and deployed by well-trained artillery personnel. Surveillance drones, operated

by a special unit of the NIA, circled above Kiesh to observe targets, to assess the damages and to
advise the commanders of artillery units how to adjust their fire.
At around six in the evening of July 17, 2009, beyond working hours, artillery shells
landed on the BAS Factory compound. The normal working hours of the factory was until 17:30
and at the time of attack, the factory was preparing for the set-up of a production line to assemble
explosive devices in accordance with a PAB contract concluded three weeks prior.
On the same night, Ash transmitted to Reed that they had received information that Neil
Bing might spend the night in his familys home. Bings residence was situated on the top floor
of a five-storey building. The following morning, Ash informed Reed that the reliable
information was confirmed that Bing was in his home where a PAB detachment was patrolling.
As a matter of precaution, Ash advised Reed to make use of the armed drones instead of artillery
fire in attacking Bings residence. Reed heeded this advice.
In other parts of the city, a plan of evacuation in case of long-range artillery attacks was
in place. Nonetheless, the two-day artillery and air attacks left the listed targets either destroyed
or rendered useless.
Thereafter, Ash informed Reed that eye witnesses saw Bethuisian soldiers taking refuge
in the Municipal Hospital in the Rosemount District, as well as in Kebia Military College, an
adjoining compound. The hospital displayed a large red crystal emblem at the entrance,
alongside with a Bethuisian flag and guarded by the Ventures staff. Thus, Reed ordered a squad
to be sent to the hospital area, with the specific reminder that threats were to be eliminated but
non-threatening persons should be spared.
At 18:05 of July 21, 2009, as the AAF squad was approaching the hospital, a Ventures
guard fired a few shots toward the squad. The squad commander then ordered his men to return
fire. There was intermittent firing from inside the Hospital and from the surrounding area. When
the squad was able to enter the hospital, ten security guards were found wounded. The squad
took away 25 people, including PAB soldiers, DKF fighters, and Ventures guards. Reed ordered
the wounded to be treated and the 25 people were detained in Westwood Prison.
On August 1, 2009, AAF was able to gain control of Kiesh but there was still strong
resistance from the local Bethuisian community.

Oppositions were actually manifested since 2007. As a matter of fact, Thomas Mange, a
professor of history at the University of Kebia delivered several speeches urging Bethuisians to
defend Kebia to the last man. Several students followed him and distributed leaflets in support of
his call. Thus, Professor Mange was arrested on July 2, 2008 by virtue of the Emergency Decree.
To hasten his release, Professor Mange embarked on a hunger strike, only sipping water
from time to time. The other detainees followed suit. Consequently, the ICRC sent a delegation
to check conditions at the Westwood Prison because of the hunger strike. Alphon authorities
pressed Reed to solve the issue regarding the hunger strike in Westwood Prison. Because of the
hunger strike, Manges health deteriorated and according to Dr. Paul Malades report, Mange was
susceptible to heart irritability and arrhythmias. Mange and the other detainees were taken to the
prison infirmary and placed under medical supervision.
After consultation with Reeds staff, Wall decided to forcibly feed Mange. After the
feeding, Mange was then placed under watch for up to 60 minutes to prevent vomiting. Two
drugs were also administered to prevent motion sickness, nausea, vomiting, pain, or as a sedative
or sleep aid. A military spokesman said that the doctors and other medical staff at the prison were
treating the detainees on hunger strike ethically and with great care.
The hunger strike ended after 27 days. Mange and some other detainees resumed taking
liquid nutritional supplements. Benjamin Lock, who had also been on hunger strike told the
Global Times an independent newspaper based in Citrea that there was collective pressure to
go on hunger strike. He did not want to starve himself for that long but he feared the unknown
consequences for taking food because some terrorist suspects were quite serious about the
hunger strike.
Later on, a new administration was elected. With casualties climbing and pressure
building up on both sides, Alphon and Bethuis started negotiations on the future status of Kebia.

SUMMARY OF PLEADINGS

General Arthur Reed is not criminally liable for the following war crimes under the ICC Statute
committed in the context of an internationalized non-international armed conflict:

First, the incidental deaths and injuries to civilians, as well as damage to civilian objects, caused
by the attacks against the BAS Factory and Colonel Neil Bings apartment are proportionate in
relation to the concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated, which is to recapture
Kiesh. Thus, Reed is not guilty of the war crime of excessive incidental death, injury or damage.

Second, Reed does not intend to attack the Municipal Hospital in Kiesh. He does not mean such
attack to be the logical consequence of his order that a squad be sent to the hospital area to check
the veracity of the information regarding belligerents taking refuge in the hospital. Hence, Reed
is not guilty of the war crime of attacking protected objects.

Lastly, Reed has no effective control over the acts of Jackson Wall in Westwood Prison.
Furthermore, solitary confinement and force-feeding of prisoners do not result to severe physical
or mental pain or suffering to constitute inhuman treatment. Therefore, Reed is not guilty of the
war crime of inhuman treatment on the basis of superior responsibility.

PLEADINGS
The armed conflict in the province of Kebia started when the DKF launched offensive
attacks against the Alphonian Government. The DKF units were able to take over local
government buildings and attacked military compounds in Kiesh and the eastern part of Kebia. 1
Thus, AAF units were dispatched to maintain control over the situation. 2 In the midst of the
internal armed conflict, Bethuis intervened by sending 2,000 PAB troops to support the DKF.3
Moreover, Bethuis supplied weapons and supported the training of the DKF.4 Ultimately, the
Alphonian Government sought control of the situation through Operation Thunderstorm headed
by General Arthur Reed.

I. GENERAL REED IS NOT GUILTY OF THE WAR CRIME OF EXCESSIVE

INCIDENTAL DEATH, INJURY OR DAMAGE.
Military objectives are those which, by their nature, location, purpose or use make an
effective contribution to military action,5 and can properly be subject to attack. If attacks on
military objectives will cause damage to civilians, international law prescribes that reasonable
care must be exercised so that civilians are not needlessly injured. 6 In case of such attacks,
precaution must be observed as to the choice of means and methods to avoid or at least minimize
incidental death or injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects. 7 It is accepted that attacks
aimed at military objects may cause collateral civilian damage. 8 In other words, it has been
established that there is a possibility of legitimate civilian casualties incidental to the conduct of
military operations but such incidental casualties must not be disproportionate to the concrete
and direct military advantage anticipated.9 Military advantage is achieved when there is total or
partial destruction, capture or neutralization of a military objective. 10 Thus, in determining the
proportionality of an attack, it is necessary to examine whether a reasonably well-informed
1

Compromis,Par.11
Ibid.,Par.10
3
Ibid.,Par.11
4
Ibid.,Par.9
5
API,Art.52(2)
6
Kupreskic,Par.524,TJ
7
API,57(2)(a)(ii)
8
Kordic,Par.52,AJ
9
Galic,Par.190,AJ
10
API,Art.52(2)
2

person in the circumstances of the actual perpetrator, making reasonable use of the information
available to him or her, could have expected excessive civilian casualties to result from the
attack.11 It is important to note that this rule does not pertain to actual damage caused nor to the
actual military advantage gained but instead refers to that which was expected and anticipated. 12
Therefore, to establish the mens rea requirement of a disproportionate attack, the Prosecution
must prove that the attack was launched wilfully and with the knowledge of circumstances
giving rise to the expectation of excessive civilian casualties.13
In this case, Reed approved the list of targets including the Democratic Kebian
Front/Peoples Army of Bethuis command center, army barracks, main communication center,
the BAS factory, and Bings residence.14The BAS factory was known to have produced
explosives prior to 200715 and three weeks before the artillery attack, they entered into a contract
with PAB to assemble explosive devices. In fact, on July 17, 2009, at the time of the attack, the
factory workers have already started to setup the production line of such explosives. 16 In the case
of Prosecutor vs Gotovina, a factory which serves as an ammunition components production
facility was believed to produce weapons-related products. Thus, it was considered a proper
target and the Trial Chamber affirmed the determination in good faith that the attack against the
factory would offer a definite military advantage.17
Bing is effectively in-charge of the operations of the DKF.18 Parenthetically, he has also
been very influential among the Bethuisians in their clamor for independence.19 In Prosecutor vs
Gotovina, the Trial Chamber ruled that the commander of the belligerent group is of such
importance that firing at his residence when he was believed to be there could disrupt his ability
to move, communicate, and command and so offered a definite military advantage, such that his
residence constituted a military target.20 In the same vein, the assumed presence of Bing in his
apartment after gathering information made such apartment a valid military target.
11

Galic,Par.58,TJ
Galic,Footnote109,TJ
13
Galic,Par.59,TJ
14
Compromis,Par.21
15
Ibid.
16
Compromis,Par.25
1713
Gotovina,Par.1902,TJ
18
As logically inferred from Paragraphs 9, 11, and 17, Compromis
19
Compromis,Par.8
20
Gotovina,Par.1899,TJ
12

The attacks abovementioned were carefully planned so as to minimize any incidental

civilian death or injury, and damage to civilian objects. The targets had corresponding
coordinates based on the records of the Alphonian government, information collected by drones
and reports from informants from Kiesh.21 Surveillance drones circled above Kiesh to observe
the targets, assess the damages and advise the commanders of artillery units how to adjust their
fires.22 In fact, the attack on the BAS Factory was executed after working hours. 23 On the other
hand, the attack on Bings apartment was enforced using air strikes which were more accurate
than artillery fires.24
The consequent civilian casualties and damage to civilian objects were merely incidental
in relation to overall military advantage which was to recapture Kiesh. The anticipated collateral
damage was assessed in light of the available information. As a matter of fact, there were
indications that civilians had started to leave Kiesh and take refuge in the countryside. A curfew
was also enforced within the city to regulate movements within. 25 These circumstances
necessarily imply that any collateral damage from the attacks carefully planned and executed
would be at a minimum. Apropos the military advantage anticipated, the expected incidental
death, injury or damage is clearly not excessive.

II. GENERAL REED IS NOT GUILTY OF ORDERING THE COMMISSION OF THE

WAR CRIME OF ATTACKING PROTECTED OBJECTS.
Civilian hospitals organized to give care to the wounded and sick may in no
circumstances be the object of attack, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the
Parties to the conflict.26 A necessary element of the war crime of attacking protected objects
includes intending such protected objects as the object of the attack. 27 A person shall be
criminally liable if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge. A person has
intent where he either means to engage in the conduct or he means to cause that consequence or
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

Compromis,Par.22
Supra,Par.23
Supra,Par.25
Supra,Par.26
Supra,Par.20
GCIV,Art.18
EOC,Art.8(2)(e)(4)

is aware that it will occur in the ordinary course of events. On the other hand, knowledge means
awareness that a circumstance exists or a consequence will occur in the ordinary course of
events.28 Further, the actus reus for ordering is that a person in a position of authority orders
another to commit an offense or orders an act or omission. The requisite mens rea is the
awareness of the substantial likelihood that a crime will be committed in the execution of that
order.29
In the case of Prosecutor vs Seromba, Seromba prohibited the refugees from going into
the parish banana plantation to get food. He further ordered Gendarmes to shoot at any refugee
who ventured there.30 The Appeals Chamber found that it is apparent from the trial judgment that
the order to shoot the refugees was a mere reinforcement of the prohibition against them from
getting food from the plantation.31 It then concluded that Serombas conduct did not constitute
the actus reus necessary to establish the fact that he ordered the commission of the crime. 32 In the
present case, Reed merely ordered a squad to be sent in the hospital area. 33 His statement
regarding the elimination of threats is a mere follow-through of the order.34 Thus, in relation to
the attack against the hospital, there is no showing that Reed ordered the same.
In addition, the case of Prosecutor vs Zigiranyirazo, the trial chamber of the ICTR found
that the authority of the accused over the guards in-charge of manning the roadblock was not
conclusive to prove that he ordered the killing of those who would pass the roadblock. Hence,
there was reasonable doubt that he either explicitly or implicitly ordered the killing. 35 In the same
vein, Reeds order to send a squad at the hospital area does not lead to the conclusion that he
intended such attack to result. His reminder on the elimination of threats does not necessarily
pertain to an attack against the hospital.

III. GENERAL REED IS NOT GUILTY OF THE WAR CRIME OF INHUMAN

TREATMENT ON THE BASIS OF SUPERIOR RESPONSIBILITY.
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

ICC,Art.30
Zigiranyirazo,Par.381,TJ
Seromba,Par.95,TJ
Seromba,Par.203,AJ
Ibid.,Par.204,AJ
Compromis,Par.33
Ibid.
Zigiranyirazo,Par.416,TJ

A. Reed has no effective control over the acts of Jackson Wall in Westwood Prison.
The basis of superior-subordinate relationship is the power of the superior to control his
subordinates.36 It is necessary that the superior has effective control over the persons committing
the offense in the sense that the former has the material ability to prevent and punish the
commission of the latters offenses.37 Such material ability means more than merely having
general influence on others behaviors, neither does being tasked with coordination constitute
command and control.38 In the case of Prosecutor vs Oric, the Appeals Chamber affirmed the
finding of the Trial Chamber that although the military police was formally part of the military, it
does not follow that the military actually possessed effective control. 39 Further, in the case of
Prosecutor vs Perisic, the Appeals Chamber held that absent any evidence to prove beyond
reasonable doubt that the commander issued an order or disciplined a soldier 40, the reasonable
interpretation could only mean influence but not effective control. 41 Absent a finding of effective
control over subordinates, superior responsibility cannot be established. 42 In the present case,
although Reed appointed Wall, there is no showing that he issued any order or has any capacity
to discipline the latter. The letter sent by Wall merely informed Reed of the situation in
Westwood Prison. Such was not meant to solicit any action from Reed, and indeed, the latter did
not act on it. Neither was the consultation with Reeds staff an evidence to conclude the existence
of superior-subordinate relationship between Reed and Wall. Based on the foregoing, it cannot be
held that Reed had superior responsibility over Walls acts in Westwood Prison even if the prison
is under military control.
B. Solitary confinement and force-feeding in Westwood Prison do not constitute inhuman
treatment.
The existence of severe physical or mental pain or suffering is an indispensable element
in the war crime of inhuman treatment. The seriousness of the harm or injury must be assessed
on a case by case basis, considering factors such as the context in which it occurs, its duration
and/or repetition, its physical and mental effects on the victim as well as the latters age and
36
37
38
39
40
41
42

Kordic,Par.840,AJ
Delalic,Par.378,TJ
Oric,Par.311,TJ
Oric,Par.113,AJ
Perisic,Par.116,AJ
Ibid,Par.117,AJ
Ibid,Par.119,AJ

gender.43 In the case of Messina vs. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights held that the
prohibition of contacts with other prisoners for security, disciplinary or protective reasons does
not in itself amount to inhuman treatment or punishment. 44 On the other hand, the following
conducts were found to constitute torture: beating, electric shocks, and mock executions;
plantones, beating, and lack of food; being held in communicado for more than three months
while being kept blindfolded with hands tied together, resulting in limb paralysis, leg injuries,
substantial weight loss and eye infection.45 The degree of physical or mental suffering required to
prove inhuman treatment is lower than that of torture.46
As to detainees, it is required in places of detention that there shall be no regulation
imposing any physical exertion dangerous to their health or involving discrimination among
them.47 They are also entitled to receive such medical attention which their state of health
requires.48
In this particular case, it cannot be said that Professor Mange suffered severe physical or
mental pain or suffering in relation to his solitary confinement for four months. 49 In addition, the
force-feeding of the detainees including him was done to prevent the further deterioration of their
health.50 Moreso, the detainees were treated ethically and with great care. 51 In fact, drugs were
administered to alleviate the pain and to prevent nausea in the course of the force-feeding
procedure.52 Therefore, based on the following, there is no actual inhuman treatment against the
detainees in Westwood Prison.

43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52

Blagojevic,Par.586,TJ
Messina vs. Italy, ECtHR
Delalic,Par.461,TJ
Naletilic,Par.246,TJ
GCIV,Art.100
Ibid.,Art.125
Compromis,Par.38
Ibid.,Par.40
Ibid.,Par.42
Ibid.,Par.41

CONCLUSION AND PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the RESPONDENT respectfully prays before this HONORABLE COURT to

declare and adjudge that:

1. General Reed is not guilty of the war crime of intentionally causing incidental loss of life or
injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects which is clearly excessive in relation to the
concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated;

2. General Reed is not guilty of the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against a hospital
which is not a military objective; and

3. General Reed is not guilty of the war crime of inhuman treatment of protected persons on the
basis of superior responsibility.

Respectfully,

Agents for the RESPONDENT