A/HRC/45/CRP.3 international humanitarian law have been reached, the provisions which operate to protect the victims of war continue to apply even when there may appear to be periods of calm. 30 35. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees the right to food as part of an adequate standard of living. Further, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was amended in December 2019,31 and now includes as a war crime in non-international armed conflict intentionally using the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. Expert studies have concluded that this could constitute a codification of existing customary international law.32 36. The term “starvation” should be understood to encompass deprivation not just of food and water but also of other goods essential for survival in a particular context. The crime of starvation does not require that victims die from starvation, only that they should intentionally be deprived of objects indispensable to their survival. This may include depriving individuals of their ability to obtain food, degrading public health, and disrupting access to clean water, or deliberate denial of food and arbitrarily refusing to allow relief operations where the survival of the civilian population is threatened. 37. With regard to such relief operations in non-international armed conflict, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Commentary on Article 18 of Additional Protocol II to the Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 states: The fact that consent is required does not mean that the decision is left to the discretion of the parties. If the survival of the population is threatened and a humanitarian organisation fulfilling the required conditions of impartiality and non-discrimination is able to remedy this situation, relief actions must take place. In fact, they are the only way of combating starvation when local resources have been exhausted. The authorities responsible for safeguarding the population in the whole of the territory of the State cannot refuse such relief without good grounds. Such a refusal would be equivalent to a violation of the rule prohibiting the use of starvation as a method of combat as the population would be left deliberately to die of hunger without any measures being taken. Consequently this would be a violation of Article 14 of the Protocol ‘(Protection of objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population)’.33 38. The primary responsibility for meeting the basic needs of civilians lies with the party that has effective control over them. All parties to the conflict in South Sudan are bound by relevant rules of customary international law applicable in a non-international armed conflict. These include requirements that parties to such conflicts must at all times abide by the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution in attack. Belligerents have an obligation to ensure that civilians are humanely treated and must hold criminally accountable those individuals and entities who may be responsible for violations of this obligation. 1. Regional human rights systems and the crime of starvation 39. As a State Party, South Sudan is bound by the provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. While there is no express provision in the African Charter 30 The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) 2016 Commentary on the First Geneva Convention (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016) on the criteria of intensity and organisation required for Article 3 to be applicable, at p. 141, para. 387; pp. 174-175, paras. 414-444, 484. See also Gabriella Venturini, The Temporal Scope of the Conventions, in A. Clapham, P. Gaeta, and M. Sassòli, (eds.), The 1949 Geneva Conventions: A Commentary, (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2015) pp. 51-66, at p. 61. 31 Article 8(2)(e)(xix) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. 32 Manuel J. Ventura, Prosecuting Starvation under International Criminal Law: Exploring the Legal Possibilities, J. INT. CRIM. JUST., Vol. 17:4, September 2019, at pp. 812-14. 33 Y. Sandoz, C. Swinarski, and B. Zimmermann (eds.), Commentary on the Additional Protocols of 8 June 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 (Geneva/Dordrecht: ICRC/Nijhoff, 1987), at para. 4885. 11