5cjxburmr

11.2.2.2 “Under the Authority” – Suspension and Substitution of GovernmentalAuthority. Occupation also requires the suspension of the territorial State’s authority and thesubstitution of the Occupying Power’s authority for the territorial State’s authority. 62The territorial State must be rendered incapable of publicly exercising its authority in theterritory, and the Occupying Power must substitute its authority for that of the territorial State. 63Invading forces in possession of the territory must have taken measures to establish theirauthority. 64 For example, such measures may include establishing its own governmentalauthority for that area and making regulations for the conduct of temporary government. 65 Thesuspension and substitution of authority may take place with local authorities continuing toadminister territory subject to the paramount authority of the Occupying Power. 66 On the otherhand, routine measures necessary to provide for unit security (e.g., warning private persons notto threaten or interfere with military operations) would not necessarily constitute measures toestablish authority over enemy territory.62 LIEBER CODE art. 3 (“Martial Law in a hostile country consists in the suspension, by the occupying militaryauthority, of the criminal and civil law, and of the domestic administration and government in the occupied place orterritory, and in the substitution of military rule and force for the same, as well as in the dictation of general laws, asfar as military necessity requires this suspension, substitution, or dictation.”).63 1956 FM 27-10 (Change No. 1 1976) 355 (“Military occupation is a question of fact. It presupposes a hostileinvasion, resisted or unresisted, as a result of which the invader has rendered the invaded government incapable ofpublicly exercising its authority, and that the invader has successfully substituted its own authority for that of thelegitimate government in the territory invaded.”). See also Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo(Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, 2005 I.C.J. 165, 230 (173-74) (“In order to reach aconclusion as to whether a State, the military forces of which are present on the territory of another State as a resultof an intervention, is an ‘occupying Power’ in the meaning of the term as understood in jus in bello, the Court mustexamine whether there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the said authority was in fact established andexercised by the intervening State in the areas in question. In the present case the Court will need to satisfy itselfthat the Ugandan armed forces in the DRC were not only stationed in particular locations, but also that they hadsubstituted their own authority for that of the Congolese Government … . [T]he territorial limits of any zone ofoccupation by Uganda in the DRC cannot be determined by simply drawing a line connecting the geographicallocations where Ugandan troops were present as has been done on the sketch-map presented by the DRC (seeparagraphs 55 and 73 above).”).64 GREENSPAN, THE MODERN LAW OF LAND WARFARE 213-14 (“An occupant sets up some form of administrationin the territory, an invader merely passing through it does not.”).65 For example, MacLeod v. United States, 229 U.S. 416, 424-25 (1913) (“When the Spanish fleet was destroyed atManila, May 1, 1898, it became apparent that the Government of the United States might be required to take thenecessary steps to make provision for the government and control of such part of the Philippines as might come intothe military occupation of the forces of the United States. The right to thus occupy an enemy’s country andtemporarily provide for its government has been recognized by previous action of the executive authority andsanctioned by frequent decisions of this court. The local government being destroyed, the conqueror may set up itsown authority and make rules and regulations for the conduct of temporary government, and to that end may collecttaxes and duties to support the military authority and carry on operations incident to the occupation. Such was thecourse of the Government with respect to the territory acquired by conquest and afterwards ceded by the MexicanGovernment to the United States.”).66 Refer to § 11.8.2 (Continued Performance of Duties by Civil Servants and Other Officials of Local Governments).747