In the Tadic Interlocutory Appeal in the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, for instance, the court stated: “Why protect civilians from belligerent violence, or ban rape, torture or the wanton destruction of hospitals, churches, museums or private property, as well as proscribe weapons causing unnecessary suffering when two sovereign States are engaged in war, and yet refrain from enacting the same bans or providing the same protection when armed violence has erupted `only' within the territory of a sovereign State?”
例如,前南斯拉夫问题国际刑事法庭在《Tadic Interlocutory Appeal》一案中指出:“为什么当两个主权国在进行战争时,要保护平民免遭敌人的暴力或禁止强奸、酷刑或蓄意摧毁医院、教堂、博物馆或私有财产以及禁用造成不必要痛苦的武器,而当武装暴行`仅'在一个主权国家领土内发生时,却不颁布同样的禁令或提供同样的保护?”MultiUn MultiUn