A/HRC/45/CRP.3 health, disrupting access to clean water, and the deliberate denial of food or access to food to weaken the opposition and those populations perceived to be loyal to them. Starvation as a method of warfare consists of deprivation of the indispensable objects with the intention of starving civilians as a method of warfare. There is no requirement that anyone should have died of starvation as a result of these acts.12 In the words of one expert study: ‘There is no requirement that the belligerent must be seeking to attain a military advantage or advantage on the battlefield therefrom. Using starvation in order to achieve other objectives, such as “ethnic cleansing” of an area or simply to annihilate or weaken the population would fall within the prohibition’.13 8. Hunger, on the other hand, could result from numerous factors (see para. 12, below). It is worth noting that a failure to fulfil the right to food or freedom from hunger does not automatically constitute starvation as a war crime, in particular if there was no deprivation of indispensable objects or where an individual did not intend to starve civilians as a method of warfare. Nevertheless, the Republic of South Sudan has international obligations under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights to respect, protect, and fulfil the right to food for all in South Sudan (see paras. 39-41, below). 9. In Western Bahr el Ghazal State, between January 2017 and November 2018, Government forces intentionally deprived the Fertit and Luo communities living under opposition control of critical resources, thereby violating the rule which protects civilians from starvation and the rule prohibiting collective punishment,14 and destroying their social fabric and livelihoods. Through brutal campaigns waged by then-SPLA15 commanders that were directed primarily against civilians residing in Wadhalelo payam, Mboro town, Ngozili, and Ngo Pere, Ngoko, and Tagoti Vimoi villages, SPLA commanders authorised their soldiers to reward themselves by pillaging objects indispensable to the survival of these rural populations, including harvests such as sorghum, cassava, and okra, and livestock including chicken, cattle, and goats.16 The Commission notes with concern that the timing of certain attacks and seasonality of organised violence during planting and harvest periods exacerbated the situation and led to additional months of food insecurity. Government forces further dispossessed and 12 See K. Dörmann, L. Doswald-Beck, and R. Kolb, Elements of War Crimes under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Sources and Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), at p. 364. 13 D. Akande and E.-C. Gillard, Conflict-induced Food Insecurity and the War Crime of Starvation of Civilians as a method of Warfare: The Underlying Rules of International Humanitarian Law, J. INT. CRIM. JUST., Vol. 17:4, September 2019, pp. 753-79 at p. 765 (footnote omitted). 14 Additional Protocol II, Article 4(2)(b). International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Customary International Humanitarian Law, 2005, Volume I: Rules [hereinafter “ICRC Rules”], at Rule 103. Collective punishment is a war crime under Art. 4(b) of the Draft Statute of the Hybrid Court for South Sudan. The Appeals Chamber of the Special Court for Sierra Leone addressed this war crime in the Fofana and Kondewa case: “The Appeals Chamber emphasises that a ‘punishment’ for the purposes of the crime of collective punishments is an indiscriminate punishment imposed collectively on persons for omissions or acts for which some or none of them may or may not have been responsible. As such, a ‘punishment’ is distinct from the targeting of protected persons as objects of attack. The targeting of protected persons as objects of war crimes and crimes against humanity may not necessarily be predicated upon a perceived transgression by such persons and therefore does not constitute collective punishments. Thus, the mens rea element of collective punishments represents the critical difference between this crime and the act of targeting. While targeting takes place on account of who the victims are, or are perceived to be, the crime of collective punishments occurs in response to the acts or omissions of protected persons, whether real or perceived. The targeting of protected persons who are residents of a particular village, for instance, is therefore distinct from the collective punishment of protected persons in a given village who are perceived to have committed a particular act, such as providing rebel forces with shelter”. SCSL-04-14-A, 28 May 2008, at para. 223. 15 On 2 October 2018, President Salva Kiir issued Republican Order No. 18/2018 changing the name of the South Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) to the South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF). For purposes of the foregoing report and for battles waged by Government forces prior to 2 October 2018, the Commission designates such forces as the “SPLA”. 16 The situation is exacerbated by the fact that soldiers are often not properly remunerated or able to support themselves and are encouraged to loot as a means of sustaining themselves. See, e.g., A/HRC/40/CRP.1, at para. 145. 6