CYIL vol. 11 (2020)

DALIBOR JÍLEK CYIL 11 (2020) care. The provision refers to classical works of art, libraries, scientific collections, precious instruments such as astronomical telescopes. 22 The provision examined does not distinguish between public and private ownership of artefacts or hospital facilities. Securing such external and internal objects does not seem to distinguish between things according to the form of ownership. The rule aims to ensure the protection of objects against all avoidable injury. Once such a civil object is used by the armed forces as a military object, it becomes a target for the enemy. However, this is a non- identical situation. The rule protects these civil objects from preventable attacks. The besieged forces have a duty to secure protected objects from bombardment, even if they are placed in fortified sites, which are the typical target of attacks as a defended area. Article 36 contains a similar inventory of cultural objects as the previous provision. However, the meaning of the rule is comparatively distinctive. Artefacts mentioned may be seized and removed for the benefit of the conquering state or nation. The provision does not exclude the removal of movables from the territory of the conquered state. The power to decide on the transfer of properties is at the sovereign discretion of the ruler of the conquering state. In any case such a ruler shall not unilaterally adopt a decision upon the ownership of artefacts. The international treaty of peace only, as a very traditional source of international law, resolves the ultimate ownership of the seized things between the conquering and conquered nation. The possessor of the artefacts must perform the act of seizure in a way to prevent injury to the objects. Under no circumstances may the possessor sell or donate property. Likewise, the United States military was prohibited from wantonly destroying or intentionally destroying, injuring, or leaving them without any care. III. Duties in the Brussels Declaration and the Oxford Manual International conferences, but especially international institutions or organs, have established intergovernmental coordination, the ad hoc or permanent form of multilateral diplomacy, including the codification of branches or institutes of international law. On the initiative of RussianTsar Alexander II, an international conference was convened in Brussels, 23 to talk over a draft of the laws and customs of war. 24 The assignment of the conference was to review the general laws and customs of war. 25 Although the representatives of the negotiating states did not come to the adoption of binding codification act, the Brussels Declaration brought impetus in relation to the 22 Article 35 states: “Classical works of art, libraries, scientific collections, or precious instruments, such as astronomical telescopes, as well as hospitals, must be secured against all avoidable injury, even when they are contained in fortified places whilst besieged or bombarded.” 23 The delegates of 15 European States met in Brussels on 27 July 1874. 24 Project of an International Declaration concerning the Laws and Customs of War. SCHINDLER, D. and TOMAN, J. (eds.), op. cit. 1, pp. 22-34. 25 Annuaires de l’Institut de Droit International, I – 1877, Gand: Imprimerie I.-S. Van Doosselaerk, rue de Bruges, 35. Protocole final de la conférence de Bruxelles, 27 Août 1874, p. 275: “Ces principes ont rencontré alors un assentiment universel. Aujourd’hui, la conférence, se maintenant dans la meme voie, s’associe à la conviction exprimée par le Gouvernement de Sa Majesté l’Empereur de Russie, qu’il y a un pas de plus à faire en révisant les lois et coutumes générales de la guerre, soit dans le but de les définir avec plus de précision, soit afin d’y tracer d’un commun accord certaines limites destinées à en restreindre, autant que possible, les rigueurs.”

288