5cjxburmr

Because sovereignty is not vested in the Occupying Power, the fact of militaryoccupation does not authorize the Occupying Power to take certain actions. For example, theOccupying Power is not authorized by the fact of belligerent occupation to annex occupiedterritory or to create a new State. 98 In addition, the Occupying Power may not compel theinhabitants of occupied territory to become its nationals or otherwise to swear allegiance to it. 99Similarly, in view of the provisional nature of belligerent occupation, the authority of theOccupying Power under occupation law has been interpreted as being subject to limitations onthe ability of the Occupying Power to alter institutions of government permanently or change theconstitution of a country. 10011.5 DUTY OF THE OCCUPYING POWER TO ENSURE PUBLIC ORDER AND SAFETYThe authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of theOccupying Power, the latter shall take all the measures in its power to restore, and ensure, as fartemporary managerial powers, for the period until a peaceful solution is reached. During that limited period, theoccupant administers the territory on behalf of the sovereign. Thus the occupant’s status is conceived to be that of atrustee.”).98 1956 FM 27-10 (Change No. 1 1976) 358 (“It is therefore unlawful for a belligerent occupant to annex occupiedterritory or to create a new State therein while hostilities are still in progress.”). Refer to § 11.6.3 (OccupyingPower’s Duty to Respect the Rights of Protected Persons Secured by the GC).99 Refer to § 11.6.2.1 (Prohibition on Compelling Inhabitants of Occupied Territory to Swear Allegiance to theHostile State).100 John B. Bellinger, III, Legal Adviser, Department of State, United Nations Security Council Resolutions and theApplication of International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Refugee Law, Sept. 9, 2005, 2005 DIGEST OFUNITED STATES PRACTICE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 958-59 (“Some commentators take the position that occupationlaw establishes limitations on the ability of the occupying power to alter institutions of government permanently orchange the constitution of a country.”). See also 2004 UK MANUAL 11.25.1 (“Since the occupying power has aduty to look after the welfare of the inhabitants, regulations, for example, fixing prices and securing the equitabledistribution of food and other commodities, are permissible. The occupying power should make no more changes tothe law than are absolutely necessary, particularly where the occupied territory already has an adequate legalsystem.”); 2001 CANADIAN MANUAL 1205(1) (“During occupation by the enemy, the sovereignty of the legitimategovernment continues to exist but it is temporarily latent. The powers of the occupant are of a provisional natureand it should only take measures, which are necessary for the purposes of the armed conflict, the maintenance oforder and safety and the proper administration of the occupied territory. Generally speaking, the occupant is notentitled to alter the existing form of government, to upset the constitution and domestic laws of the occupiedterritory, or to set aside the rights of the inhabitants.”); JULIUS STONE, LEGAL CONTROLS OF INTERNATIONALCONFLICT 698 (1954) (“The limits on the legislative and regulatory power are as vague as the authority is general.The Occupant’s authority is ‘military authority’. Clearly this is not full sovereignty, but equally clearly it extendsunder the regulations to civil matters. His authority, of course, is limited like all his other powers to the occupiedterritory, under Article 42, paragraph 2; and by Article 43 the Occupant must respect the laws in force unless‘absolutely prevented’. But this last limitation has never been taken literally; and unless it is so taken, theboundaries of the Occupant’s legislative power are still to be drawn. The most widely approved line of distinction isthat the Occupant, in view of his merely provisional position, cannot make permanent changes in regard tofundamental institutions, for instance, change a republic into a monarchy. It becomes, however, increasinglydifficult to say with confidence what is a fundamental institution.”).754