[1]

PLENARY COMMISSION

FIRST MEETING

MAY 23, 1899

Mr. Martens presiding.

The President thanks the Commission for the honor it has done him. He hopes that at the end of its labors the Commission will be able to say with the poet: "I have done a little good, and that is my best work."

Mr. MARTENS recalls that the task of the Second Commission is to examine Articles 5, 6 and 7 of the circular of Count MOURAVIEFF, relating to the Geneva Convention of 1864, to its extension to maritime war, and to the revision of the draft Declaration elaborated by the Brussels Conference of 1874.

The Commission may therefore be subdivided into two subcommissions, the first to examine the questions relating to the Red Cross and the second those concerning the Brussels project regarding the laws of war.

As president of the first of these subcommissions, Mr. MARTENS proposes Mr. ASSER, delegate from the Netherlands.

On motion of Chevalier Descamps, Mr. MARTENS is designated as president of the second subcommission.

The President proposes to the Commission to fix the procedure with regard to the record of the meetings. He suggests that no authentic and printed minutes be prepared, but that the member of the Commission designated as reporter take notes which the Commission may consult.

Mr. Asser insists that it will be necessary for the members of the Commission who have taken the floor during a meeting to be able to verify the exactness of the record as regards themselves. (Approval.)

Mr. Renault explains that if the reporter of a commission is obliged to take notes throughout the meeting, he may be prevented from advantageously following and taking part in the discussions.

In the second place, he expresses the opinion that the reporter should not be designated until the discussion is closed and solutions have been adopted.

Chevalier Descamps proposes that as regards the minutes the secretariat be instructed to prepare:

1. As complete an account as possible of the meeting, which will not be printed and which will be kept at the disposal of the Commission.

2. An analytical account summarizing the formal propositions made at meet

ings which will be distributed to all the members.

This mode of procedure will enable the minutes of the Commission not to

be given an authentic and formal character and will insure a more free, intimate, and less official discussion.

As regards the designation of the reporter, Mr. DESCAMPS is not of opinion that it should await the formation of a majority. According to him, the mission of the reporter of a diplomatic conference ought to be to point out to the plenary assembly the general outline of the discussions and the character of the solutions proposed, without taking into account his personal opinion. He is therefore of opinion that the reporter may be appointed at once.

[2] The Commission indorses this view.

The President, with the consent of the Commission, says that secrecy will be guarded in respect to the deliberations and that the minutes will be absolutely confidential in character. He proposes to proceed to a first exchange of views regarding the object of the labors of the Commission.

Mr. Renault observes that the revision of the Geneva Convention of 1864 does not figure in the program outlined in the Russian circular of December 30, 1898.

The meeting adjourns.

SECOND MEETING

MAY 25, 1899

Mr. Martens presiding.

The minutes of the first meeting are read and adopted.

The President informs the Commission that Professor NAGAO ARIGA has been appointed technical delegate of the Japanese Government to the International Peace Conference.

Mr. MARTENS invites the Commission to exchange its views on the different points submitted to its deliberations; he thinks that Articles 5 and 6 of the Russian circular might be proposed for study by the first subcommission; Article 7 of the same circular might constitute the task assigned to the first [second] subcommission.

He explains that the discussion of the additional articles of 1868 will necessarily lead the Commission to consider the articles of the Geneva Convention of 1864, but that, in order to remain within the limits indicated by the program of Count MOURAVIEFF, the Commission will have to confine itself to expressing wishes.

It would therefore be useful for the Commission to proceed to an exchange of general views on the two following questions:

1. Is it desirable that the Red Cross be respected in maritime war?

2. Should the principle of the neutralization of relief vessels for shipwrecked persons be recognized?

A general discussion of these points would impart a useful direction to the labors of the first subcommission.

Then the questions relating to the Brussels draft Declaration might be examined in the same way, so as to define the task of the second subcommission.

Colonel Gilinsky reads two propositions which were prepared by the Russian War Ministry and which appear to him acceptable as a basis for the eventual revision of the Geneva Convention.

After an exchange of observations among Messrs. Martens, Asser, Beldiman, and General Mounier, it is decided that the propositions of Colonel GILINSKY shall be inserted in the minutes in order to serve as materials for the subsequent studies of the question.

These propositions are worded as follows:

1. Revision of the Geneva Convention of 1864, taking into consideration the propositions made by the International Conferences of the Red Cross Society in 1867, 1869 and 1884.

The purpose of such revision would be to bring the provisions now in force into concordance with the conditions of battles of to-day, the great masses of combatants requiring a prompt and adequately organized relief.

For this purpose private medical societies, with their own means of transpor

tation, and foreign physicians enjoying the protection of the sign of the Red Cross, might be permitted to participate in the work of relief.

2. Creation of an "International Red Cross Bureau," recognized by all the Powers and established on the principles of international law, in order to settle all questions regarding volunteer medical assistance and relief during war, in accordance with the declaration of Russia at the Red Cross Conference held at Geneva in 1884.

[3] Chevalier Descamps expresses the desire that the competency of the Commission may be exactly determined, so that the discussion may be limited to the extent of this competency, and he requests the delegates from Switzerland to kindly make known any special views which they might have on the questions.

Mr. Odier does not think that the Commission is competent to proceed to a revision of the Geneva Convention. In order to undertake such a work, it would be necessary first of all to have the assistance of technical experts in the medical and sanitary line, besides representation from all the States signatory to the Convention. Under these circumstances Mr. ODIER thinks that it would be well for the Commission to express its opinion right now, by means of a declaration, regarding the suitability of referring to a special conference the examination of the revision of the acts of 1864 and 1868.

Mr. Asser considers that a distinction should be made between competency in fact and competency in law. It is true that, for the reasons expressed by Mr. ODIER, the Commission is incompetent in fact to pass on questions of a medical and sanitary nature.

However, he does not think that the Commission ought to consider itself limited so narrowly to the text of the circular of Count MOURAVIEFF, and he recalls the fact that in accordance with the circular of Mr. DE BEAUFORT of April 6, 1899, prepared with the consent of the Russian Government, the Conference will have to examine not only the points set forth by the MOURAVIEFF program, but also "all other questions connected with the ideas set forth in the circular of August 12/24, 1898."

An exchange of views along these lines appears to him to be within the competency of the Commission and might, in a form to be determined by the subcommission, serve to call the attention of the Governments to the points which have been taken into consideration.

The President thinks that he can interpret the passage cited from the circular of Mr. DE BEAUFORT in the sense indicated by Article 35 of the Declaration of 1874 concerning the laws and customs of war.

He thinks, to sum up, that the Commission is not competent to raise questions which depart from the eight points of the circular of Count MOURAVIeff, but that the first subcommission may express ideas and wishes which do not bind the Conference.

As to the task of the second subcommission, it is defined by the text of the Declaration of 1874. The Russian Government thinks that the time has come to proceed to a revision and confirmation of this act which, although not ratified, has been sanctioned by military practice.

Upon an inquiry by Chevalier DESCAMPS, the President declares that the delegates will have full freedom to propose amendments to the different articles. The Commission adopts this mode of procedure.

The meeting adjourns.