The Encyclopedia is a project of the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights launched on 2 December 2013. The Enyclopedia aims to provide accurate, up-to-date information on weapons, the effects of their use, and their regulation under public international law, in a format that is accessible to non-specialists.
+ Find out moreThe term ‘expanding bullets’ refers to bullets that have a tendency to expand or flatten in the human body. The term was used in the 1899 Hague Declaration, which prohibited bullets like the ‘dumdum’ bullet, a British 19th-century rifle bullet.
According to the Declaration, the
use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions
is prohibited pursuant to the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets.
The Declaration applied to the use of expanding bullets ‘in time of war between civilized nations’ (equivalent to international armed conflict) and was adopted mostly with a view to ban the British dumdum bullet (see 'Types'), a 19th-century rifle bullet considered by many to cause unnecessarily injurious wounds. Although the Hague Declaration is still formally binding on some states, its practical relevance today lies in the rule of customary international law it sets forth.
According to the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), state practice establishes as a norm of customary international humanitarian law (IHL) applicable in both international and non-international armed conflicts that
the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body is prohibited.ICRC, Customary IHL Study, 2005, Rule 77.
The ICRC found that state practice is in conformity with this prohibition, and that no state has asserted that it would be lawful to use such ammunition.ICRC, Customary IHL Study, 2005, Rule 77. Certain scholars have, however, expressed doubt as to the customary law status of the prohibition on expanding bullets, particularly in non-international armed conflicts.See W. H. Parks, 'Conventional Weapons and Weapons Reviews', 8(2005) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 89, citing Turns and Greenwood in footnote 136.
The prohibition on expanding bullets is often understood as a concrete application of the rule enshrined in the 1868 Saint Petersburg Declaration against arms that ‘uselessly aggravate the sufferings of disabled men, or render their death inevitable’. According to this rule of customary IHL applicable in non-international and international armed conflicts (the so-called SIrUS rule), it is prohibited to use means and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.ICRC,Customary IHL Study, 2005, Rule 70. The connection is evident, for example in the 1913 Oxford Manual of the Laws of Naval War. Pursuant to Art. 16
it is forbidden …To employ arms, projectiles, or materials calculated to cause unnecessary suffering. Entering especially into this category are … bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not cover the core entirely or is pierced with incisions.
According to the ICRC, there is general agreement that expanding bullets would cause unnecessary suffering.ICRC, Customary IHL Study, 2005, Rule 77. The ICRC acknowledges, however, that some ambiguity persists regarding the practice of the United States of America (USA), which asserts that bullets captured by the definition of the 1899 Hague Declaration could be legal if they did not cause unnecessary suffering, i.e. if the suffering could be justified by military necessity.ICRC, 2005 Customary IHL Study, Rule 77. Although the USA has never formally adhered to the 1899 Hague Declaration, ‘it has acknowledged and respected its applicability in conventional combat operations in the wars in which United States forces have participated’. ('Use of Expanding Ammunition by U.S. Military Forces in Counterterrorist Incidents (DAJA-IA 1985/7026, 23 September 1985)', The Army Lawyer, International Law Note, DA PAM 27-50-155, November 1985) The USA is party to 1907 Hague Convention IV and bound by Article 23(e) of the annexed Regulations, which prohibits the employment of ‘arms, projectiles, or material calculated to cause unnecessary suffering’. Pursuant to Article 35(2) of 1977 Additional Protocol I, ‘It is prohibited to employ weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering’. The USA accepts that the more recent formulation of this so-called 'SIrUS rule' in Article 35(2) codifies customary IHL and is therefore binding upon the USA and all other states. ('Sniper Use of Open-Tip Ammunition', Memorandum for Commander, United States Army Special Operations Command, 12 October 1990 (restricted access).) The US interpretation of the SIrUS rule nevertheless requires a purpose- or intent-element, as did the English version of Article 23(e) of the 1907 Hague Regulations. As a consequence, the USA considers that only expanding bullets designed or modified ‘for the purpose of increasing or causing suffering beyond that required by military necessity’ are prohibited under international law, including under the 1899 Hague Declaration. ('Sniper Use of Open-Tip Ammunition', Memorandum for Commander, United States Army Special Operations Command, 12 October 1990.) It has, for instance, been suggested that it would not be correct to conclude that the more severe injury to a ‘combatant or terrorist target’ in ‘urban or counterterrorist operations’ resulting from the use of an expanding bullet would necessarily be superfluous in view of the reduced risk to civilians from expanding bullets (because of a lesser risk of over-penetration and ricochet).W. H. Parks, 'Conventional Weapons and Weapons Reviews', 8(2005) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 90, citing Greenwood. See also, J. F. Berry, 'Hollow Point Bullets: How History has Hijacked their Use in Combat and Why it is Time to Reexamine the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets', 206(2010) Military Law Review, 126. Ambiguity about whether the use of expanding bullets prohibited under the 1899 Hague Declaration is ipso facto a violation of the SIrUS rule also persists in relation to international criminal law relating to expanding bullets (see below).
The argument that the wounding effect on the target should be balanced against the reduced risk of injury to civilians in the vicinity of the target (assuming that expanding bullets are less likely to pass through the target or objects, to injure through ricochet, or sometimes, assuming that some expanding bullets are more accurate),J. F. Berry, 'Hollow Point Bullets: How History has Hijacked their Use in Combat and Why it is Time to Reexamine the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets', 206(2010) Military Law Review, 126. See also, W. H. Parks, 'Conventional Weapons and Weapons Reviews', 8(2005) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 90, citing Greenwood. possibly informed by human rights considerations for the safety of bystanders (see below) relies on IHL rules protecting civilians against the effects of hostilities (including the rule of distinction) and challenges the protection afforded to combatants under IHL from the infliction of superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering.
International humanitarian law (IHL) only regulates the use of expanding bullets as a means of warfare, that is, their use in the conduct of hostilities in an armed conflict. Thus, the use of expanding bullets in a law enforcement operation, even during a situation of armed conflict, does not amount to a violation of the 1899 Hague Declaration or the customary IHL rule it sets forth.
Use of expanding bullets for law enforcement purposes is, however, governed by the strict requirements of international human rights law on the use of lethal force.For a brief discussion, see N. Melzer, 'Conceptual Distinction and Overlaps Between Law Enforcement and the Conduct of Hostilities', in T. D. Gill, D. Fleck (eds.), The Handbook of the International Law of Military Operations, 2010, 46. The use of expanding bullets for sports or hunting purposes is subject to national regulation.
The type of injuries associated with expanding bullets fired from military rifles raises concerns, inter alia, under the right to life of the suspected offender.See, e.g., Art. 6, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. An argument can also be made that bullets, which cause unnecessarily injurious wounds violate the right not to be subjected to cruel or inhuman treatment.See, e.g., Art. 7, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The 1990 Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (BPUFF) mandate governments and law enforcement agencies to ‘adopt and implement rules and regulations on the use of force and firearms against persons by law enforcement officials’. In developing such rules and regulations, they ‘shall keep the ethical issues associated with the use of force and firearms constantly under review’.Principle 1. Pursuant to Principle 11, such rules and regulations should include guidelines that ‘prescribe the types of firearms and ammunition permitted’ and ‘prohibit the use of those firearms and ammunition that cause unwarranted injury or present an unwarranted risk’. What this implies for the legality of bullets that expand within the body is not finally settled, but, at a minimum, careful review is needed of any ammunition to ensure that it does not ‘cause unwarranted injury or present an unwarranted risk’.
It should be noted that expanding bullets commonly used by police forces for law enforcement purposes tend to be fired from handguns, such as pistols, and generally travel at a much lower velocity than bullets fired from a military rifle. They therefore deposit less energy on impact than rifle bullets and are less prone to cause the type of especially severe wounds that led to the prohibition of expanding bullets as a means of warfare. Certain legal experts have argued that if fired from a military rifle, bullets that expand in the human body, such as hollow-point or soft-nose bullets, should be banned in law-enforcement scenarios on the basis that they cause unwarranted injury.R. Geiss, 'Poison, Gas and Expanding Bullets: The Extension of the List of Prohibited Weapons at the Review Conference of the International Criminal Court in Kampala, 13(2010) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 345.
At the same time, bullets that expand in the human body tend to present a lesser risk to the lives of bystanders. Because they transfer their kinetic energy quickly to the target, these bullets are less likely to pass through the target or other objects and into another person, or to injure bystanders through ricochet. The ICRC notes that several states have decided that for domestic law-enforcement purposes, outside armed conflict, in particular where it is necessary to confront an armed person in an urban environment or crowd of people, expanding bullets may be used by police to ensure that the bullets used do not pass through the body of a suspect into another person and to increase the chance that once hit, the suspect is prevented from firing back.ICRC, Customary IHL Study, 2005, Rule 77. Some consider that the lesser energy of bullets fired from handguns, together with the reduced risk to bystanders and a better chance of rapid incapacitation, mean ‘that use of police bullets [referring to ‘expanding handgun ammunition’] with lead exposed at the tip is not incompatible with reasonable use of force’.R. Coupland, D. Loye, 'The 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets: A Treaty Effective for more than 100 Years Faces Complex Contemporary Issues', 85(849)(2003) International Review of the Red Cross, 141.
Justifications for the use of expanding bullets geared toward the protection of bystanders raise difficult questions when the boundary between conduct of hostilities and law enforcement is blurred.This is perhaps increasingly the case, either because it is disputed whether an armed conflict exists at the relevant time and place, or because it is unclear whether, during an armed conflict, the use of force in question is part of a combat or a policing operation. Use of expanding bullets has been justified in counterinsurgency or counterterrorist operations that may in some instances qualify as conduct of hostilities under international law.A 1985 Opinion of the US Judge Advocate General concluded that use of expanding ammunition, including ‘dum-dum bullets, hollow-point bullets, and soft-point bullets’ by US military forces in ‘counterterrorist incidents’ or ‘counterterrorist situations’ would be legal. The Opinion is ambiguous regarding the qualification of such operations under international law. See, 'Use of Expanding Ammunition by U.S. Military Forces in Counterterrorist Incidents (DAJA-IA 1985/7026, 23 September 1985)', The Army Lawyer, International Law Note, DA PAM 27-50-155, November 1985.
‘Employing bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions’ is listed in Article 8(2)(b)(xix) of the Rome Statute, among the ‘serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict’ that amount to war crimes under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.Although inclusion of language concerning prohibited weapons was contentious, ‘the prohibition on expanding bullets was evidently uncontroversial’ and was seen as an extension of the customary rule prohibiting the use of weapons which inflict unnecessarily cruel wounds. (J. F. Berry, 'Hollow Point Bullets: How History has Hijacked their Use in Combat and Why it is Time to Reexamine the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets', 206(2010) Military Law Review, citing Bothe, 125–6.) The use of expanding bullets is also a war crime under the jurisdiction of the panels of judges within the District Court in Dili, East Timor, with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences (UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15, Section 6(1)(b)(xix).
States Parties to the Kampala Review Conference of the Rome Statute, held on 31 May–11 June 2010, adopted Article 8(2)(e)(xv) of the Rome Statute, which makes the use of expanding bullets, prohibited in international armed conflict by Article (2)(b)(xix), also punishable as a war crime under the jurisdiction of the Court if committed in the context of a non-international armed conflict. The inclusion of this crime in the Court’s Statute was based on a Belgian proposal and was somewhat contentious, not least due to uncertainty regarding the compliance of certain types of modern bullets with the prohibition on expanding bullets under international law.See, ‘Report of the Working Group on other amendments’, RC/11, Annex IV, §§3–8. The Elements of Crime regarding the war crime of using expanding bullets in international and non-international armed conflict are identical, aside from the requirement that the conduct in question must be ‘associated with an international armed conflict’ in relation to Article 8(2)(b)(xix), respectively, that it must take place ‘in the context of and was associated with an armed conflict not of an international character’ in relation to Article 8(2)(e)(xv). Preambular paragraph 9 of Resolution 5 regarding ‘Amendments to article 8 of the Rome Statute’ (which includes the amendment concerning the use of expanding bullets in non-international armed conflict) expresses the Review Conference’s ‘understanding that the crime is committed only if the perpetrator employs the bullets to uselessly aggravate suffering or the wounding effect upon the target of such bullets, as reflected in customary international law’.‘Amendments to article 8 of the Rome Statute’, Resolution RC/Res.5, Adopted at the 12th plenary meeting, on 10 June 2010. See also, ‘Report of the Working Group on other amendments’, Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Kampala, 31 May - 11 June 2010, Official Records, RC/11, Annex IV, § 5. This formulation appears to introduce a mens rea element not specified in the Elements of Crime. The latter merely require that the perpetrator be ‘aware that the nature of the bullets was such that their employment would uselessly aggravate suffering or the wounding effect’. Commentators have pointed out that such a ‘specific intent’ requirement would be ‘incongruous with the established Elements of Crimes’ and cannot have any bearing on them.R. Geiss, 'Poison, Gas and Expanding Bullets: The Extension of the List of Prohibited Weapons at the Review Conference of the International Criminal Court in Kampala, 13(2010) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 347; C. Garraway, 'Superior orders and the International Criminal Court: Justice delivered or justice denied', 836(1999) International Review of the Red Cross, raises questions about the mens rea requirement in relation to soldiers’ awareness of a bullets’ effects in the human body.)
Given the widespread use of soft-nosed and hollow-point bullets that expand in the human body for law enforcement purposes, Resolution 5 regarding ‘Amendments to article 8 of the Rome Statute’ adopted by the Review Conference, also confirms ‘the exclusion from the Court’s jurisdiction of law enforcement situations’ in relation to the war crime of using expanding bullets.
Recalling the 1899 Hague Declaration, a Resolution on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems was adopted in 1979 by the UN Conference on Prohibitions or Restrictions of Use of Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW). It called for further research on the wounding effects of small-calibre weapon systems and appealed to all governments ‘to exercise the utmost care in the development of small-calibre weapon systems, so as to avoid an unnecessary escalation of the injurious effects of such systems’.
In August 1994, at the third session of the group of governmental experts to prepare the first Review Conference of the CCW, Switzerland introduced a ‘Draft Protocol on small calibre weapon systems’ (UN doc. CCW/CONF.I/GE/16) aimed at prohibiting the use of excessively injurious small-calibre arms and ammunition. The Review Conference did not take action on the Swiss proposal, but in the Final Declaration it proposed that ‘the next Review Conference may consider the question of preparing a possible additional Protocol on small-calibre weapons’.Final Declaration, Annex C to UN Doc. CCW/CONF.I/16 (Part I). For a discussion, see E.Prokosch, 'The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems', 307(1995) International Review of the Red Cross.
During the preparatory process for the Second Review Conference of the CCW held in 2001, Switzerland made a proposal for a protocol aimed at establishing, in the light of recent scientific and technological progress, standards to limit the injuries and unnecessary suffering caused by small-calibre weapons and munitions. The Conference endorsed informal efforts to examine the subject, but did not mandate a group of technical experts to look into the issue.Second Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons which May Be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, Geneva, 11-21 December 2001, 'Final Document', UN doc. CCW/CONF.II/2, 16 January 2002, 3; For an overview, see L. Maresca, 'Second Review Conference of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons', 845(2002) International Review of the Red Cross.
The UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin on the Observance by United Nations Forces of International Humanitarian Law (1999) requires that UN forces respect the rules prohibiting or restricting the use of certain weapons and methods of combat under the relevant instruments of international humanitarian law. In this connection it lists bullets which ‘expand or flatten easily in the human body’.UN Secretary-General’s Bulletin, Observance by United Nations Forces of International Humanitarian Law, UN doc. ST/SGB/1999/13 of 6 August 1999, Art. 6.2.
The Schengen acquis – Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985 between the Governments of the States of the Benelux Economic Union, the Federal Republic of Germany, and France on the gradual abolition of checks at their common borders mandates contracting parties to establish controls over the acquisition, possession, trade in, and handing over, of firearms and ammunition by natural and legal persons (not applicable to the armed forces or the police), including by establishing a class of ‘prohibited firearms and ammunition’ (Art. 78(a)). Pursuant to Art. 79(1)(e) the list of prohibited firearms and ammunition shall include ‘ammunition for pistols and revolvers with dumdum or hollow-pointed projectiles and projectiles for such ammunition’.Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, OJ L 239, 22.9.2000, 19–62.
In September 2009, three Danish soldiers of the Danish contingent in the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan (ISAF) were found in possession of unauthorized 9mm ‘jacketed hollow point’ ammunition for pistols, which have an expanding effect in the body. The soldiers were sent home from Afghanistan and charged under Article 36(2) of the Danish military penal code.Annual report, Military Prosecution Service, 2009, 22 (in Danish). According to a press release by the Military Prosecution Service, they were convicted on 30 March 2010 and fined for particularly grave dereliction of duty. The Military Prosecution Service reported that the ammunition, commonly referred to as ‘dumdum ammunition’, was prohibited under the 1899 Hague Declaration because it was considered to be unnecessarily injurious. The ammunition had not been used by the soldiers.Annual report, Military Prosecution Service, 2010, 53 (in Danish).
Some national laws regulating the civilian possession and use of firearms specifically criminalise the use of expanding bullets or dumdum bullets. For example, the Code of Criminal Justice of the US state New Jersey lists 'Dum-dum or body armor penetrating bullets' among 'Prohibited Weapons and Devices'. (Title 2C:39(3)(f))
Last updated on: 04 August 2017
The late nineteenth century saw the introduction and widespread adoption of small-bore rifles, lighter bullets, and smokeless powder, leading to bullets being fired at increased velocity and longer distances. At the same distance, bullets shot from newer rifles possessed much greater energy on impact.Chassepot rifles employed by the French in the Franco-German war (1870-1871) were reported to propel the bullet with such velocity that at near ranges, when striking a compact bone, the soft lead composing the bullet frequently flew into fragments, and produce effects resembling an explosion. A. Ogston, 'The Wounds Produced by Modern Small-Bore Bullets' (pdf), British Medical Journal, 17 September 1898, 814. The greater heat generated when firing these rifles caused conventional lead alloy bullets to adhere to the grooves in the barrel, causing fouling. To avoid direct contact of the lead with the rifle bore, and to prevent bullets from losing their shape in passing through the rapid twists of the rifling, the leaden core of bullets was wrapped into a hard metallic mantle. These modern, fully-jacketed rifle bullets were used, for example, in the French war in Dahomey, in the Italian war with King Menelik in Abyssinia, and by the English at the North-Western frontier and Chitral in India. The bullets were found to have considerable penetration power, and if they did not hit hard tissue of the body (bone), they were capable of traversing one or even several human bodies without causing very severe wounds (unless they hit a vital organ).A. Ogston, 'The Wounds Produced by Modern Small-Bore Bullets', British Medical Journal, 17 September 1898, 814.
The British, engaged in conflicts with what they considered ‘semicivilised or barbarous races’, found that their enemies continued to advance even after being pierced through by modern fully-mantled bullets. During the British Chitral campaign (1895), some British soldiers therefore rubbed the mantle off the nose of the bullet permitting the leaden core to expand on impact, so as to cause disabling flesh wounds and quickly incapacitate advancing ‘fanatical tribes’. This alteration was then carried out in the ammunition factory at Dum Dum, a small town near Calcutta, producing what became known as the dumdum bullet.The bullets were issued by order of the Government of India. Her Majesty’s Government was fully informed, but was neither asked nor required to sanction the production. (M. Waldren, Dum-Dum Bullets, Police Firearms Officers Association (PFOA), Police History Series, 12.) This dumdum bullet was used by British troops in the Tirah campaign and in wars on the north-west frontier of the Indian Empire (today Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province on the border with Afghanistan).
The effects of the dumdum bullet gave rise to controversy with some medical experts considering this type of bullet to be inhumane. At the 1899 International Peace Conference in The Hague, several nations signed a Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets, committing to ‘abstain from the use of bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body, such as bullets with a hard envelope which does not entirely cover the core or is pierced with incisions’, in the case of a war between two or more of them. The formulation of the ban was based in large part on experiments conducted by von Bruns, a German Surgeon-General, who believed that the lack of a hard mantle at the nose of bullets accounted for the severe wounding effect. Already at that time, experts opposed to a ban that in their eyes unduly focused on the British dumdum bullet, pointed out that severe wounds were also produced by other types of bullets that did not share the characteristics described in the 1899 Hague Declaration. Notably, the high velocity of bullets and their propensity to tumble or to fragment within the human body at short range were identified as problematic factors.A. Ogston, 'The Wounds Produced by Modern Small-Bore Bullets' (pdf), British Medical Journal, 17 September 1898, 815.
Allegations of improvised alterations to bullets in violation of the prohibition on 1899 expanding bullets have since been made in many conflicts, but it is probably correct to say that ‘the bullets specifically described in the [Hague] Declaration have not, for the most part, been used in war.’E.Prokosch, 'The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems', 307(1995) International Review of the Red Cross. A French Commission of Inquiry looking into violations of international law committed by the enemy (1914-1916) established that German soldiers often used bullets altered to cause more cruel or dangerous wounds, including through incisions and or by partly removing the hard envelope of the bullet. (Documents relatifs à la guerre 1914-1915-1916, Rapports et procès-verbaux d’enquête de la Commission instituée en vue de constater les actes commis par l’ennemi en violation du droit des gens, III-IV, 1916, 9-10 and photographic annex. See images below.) More recently, three soldiers of the Danish battalion in Afghanistan were convicted for carrying hollow-point bullets in their pistols in September 2009. The investigation did not find evidence that such bullets had been used by Danish soldiers during combat engagements in Afghanistan.
After the 1939–45 War, research showed that the majority of rifle engagements took place at 300 metres or less, which led to the development of shorter range assault rifles and smaller-calibre ammunition with higher velocity. In the 1960s, the USA introduced the M16 rifle with its M193 5.56 x 45mm ammunition. Russia followed in the 1970s with the AK74 rifle and its 5.45 x 39mm calibre ammunition, while NATO countries generally adopted 5.56 x 45mm ammunition in the 1980s. M. J. Iremonger, P. J. Hazell, 'Influence of Small Arms Bullet Construction on Terminal Ballistics', 21st International Symposium on Ballistics, 2004, at 767. The Vietnam War saw renewed international concern over the wounding effects of rifle bullets. In 1974, at the first session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, seven states presented a proposal for a ban on the use of especially injurious bullets (document CDDH/DT/2), which was later revised and submitted to the Conference by Sweden (as document CDDH/IV/204). At that time, experts ascribed the severe wounding effects of small-calibre weapon systems to the tendency of high-velocity bullets to tumble or break up in the human body. Expert discussions and symposia on wound ballistics did not lead to consensus on the wounding effects of small-calibre weapon systems and no protocol regulating their use was negotiated. But a Resolution on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems was adopted in 1979 by the UN Conference on Prohibitions or Restrictions of Use of Certain Conventional Weapon. It recalled the 1899 Hague Declaration, called for further research on the wounding effects of small-calibre weapon systems, and appealed to all governments ‘to exercise the utmost care in the development of small-calibre weapon systems, so as to avoid an unnecessary escalation of the injurious effects of such systems’.
In the 1980s, NATO countries adopted as standard a 5.56mm calibre rifle bullet (the Belgian SS 109) similar to the US 5.56mm bullet. In 1994, the ICRC organized an experts meeting to discuss the wounding effects of different military rifle bullets in light of modern understanding of wound ballistics. The tumbling of a bullet was identified as a critical mechanism resulting in severe injuries. It became clear that depending on their construction, fully-jacketed bullets, which were not the focus of the 1899 Hague Declaration’s prohibition, could deform or break up as a result of the stresses exerted during this turning, and inflict severe wounds. E.Prokosch, 'The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems', 307(1995) International Review of the Red Cross. In August 1994, at the third session of the group of governmental experts to prepare the first Review Conference of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), Switzerland introduced a ‘Draft Protocol on small calibre weapon systems’ (CCW/CONF.I/GE/16) aimed at prohibiting the use of excessively injurious small-calibre arms and ammunition. The Review Conference did not take action on the Swiss proposal, but in the Final Declaration it proposed that ‘the next Review Conference may consider the question of preparing a possible additional Protocol on small-calibre weapons’.Final Declaration, Annex C to UN Doc. CCW/CONF.I/16 (Part I). For a discussion, see E.Prokosch, 'The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems', 307(1995) International Review of the Red Cross] Switzerland subsequently hosted a series of workshops on wound ballistics between 1997 and 2001.[For more detail, see H. Parks, ‘Conventional Weapons and Weapons Review’, 8(2005) Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, 88. In light of these discussions and advances in wound ballistics, Switzerland submitted another proposal to establish standards to limit the injuries and unnecessary suffering caused by small-calibre weapons and munitions to the Second Review Conference of CCW held in 2001. The Conference endorsed informal efforts to examine the subject, but did not mandate a group of technical experts to look into the issue.Second Review Conference of the States Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons which May Be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects, Geneva, 11-21 December 2001, 'Final Document', UN doc. CCW/CONF.II/2, 16 January 2002, 3; For an overview, see L. Maresca, 'Second Review Conference of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons', 845(2002) International Review of the Red Cross.
Last updated on: 04 August 2017
The 1899 Hague Declaration aimed at prohibiting nineteenth century rifle bullets similar to the British dumdum bullet. A wide range of modern rifle and handgun bullets share some construction characteristics with the dumdum bullet, are intended to expand or flatten easily in the human body, and/or produce effects within the human body that resemble those of the dumdum bullet.
The original dumdum bullet was a British standard bullet ‘Cartridge S.A. Ball, Magazine Rifle Cordite Mark II’ that had been altered by removing the hard metal mantle at its nose and exposing its lead core.M. Waldren, Dum-Dum Bullets, Police Firearms Officers Association (PFOA), Police History Series, 3-4 The alteration, at first improvised by British troops in India, was then carried out in the ammunition factory at Dum Dum, a small town near Calcutta, giving the bullet its name. Churchill described the bullet in the following terms:
Of the bullet it may be said, that its stopping power is all that could be desired. The Dum-Dum bullet, though not explosive, is expansive. The original Lee-Metford bullet was a pellet of lead covered by a nickel case with an opening at the base. In the improved bullet this outer case has been drawn backward, making the hole in the base a little smaller and leaving the lead at the tip exposed. The result is a wonderful and from the technical point of view a beautiful machine.Sir Winston S. Churchill, The Story of the Malakand Field Force: An Episode of Frontier War, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1916, 326.
Subsequently, the ordnance factory at Woolwich, England, designed Cartridge S.A. Ball .303 inch Cordite Mark III (the ‘Woolwich bullet’) in 1897. An improved version, the Mark IV, consisted of a solid lead core with a cupro-nickel jacket. The tip had a cylindrical hole bored into it (a ‘hollow-point’ or ‘hollow-fronted’ bullet). This bullet was used by British troops in the course of the Mahdist war (the Anglo-Sudan war) during the battle of Omdurman (September 1898). Expanding bullets of the type Mark IV were also on issue to British troops in South Africa, but they were withdrawn early in the Second Anglo-Boer War that broke out shortly after the 1899 Hague Declaration was adopted. In that conflict, alterations to fully-jacketed bullets (uncovering the core at the tip of the bullet) were carried out by soldiers on both sides, but never on a wide scale.M. Waldren, Dum-Dum Bullets, Police Firearms Officers Association (PFOA), Police History Series, 9; J. C. de Villiers, 'The Medical Aspect of the Anglo Boer War, 1899 - 1902: Part 1', 6(2)1983) Military History Journal [of the South African Military History Society].
Similar expanding bullets, with the nose more or less uncovered, were also in use in Switzerland and in Portugal, and ‘soft-nosed’ bullets were used at the time for killing big game (such as the German Mauser big-game hunting bullet).For a brief description of the Swiss and Portuguese bullets, see A. Ogston, 'The Peace Conference and the Dum-Dum Bullet', British Medical Journal, 29 July 1899, 279.
According to a modern understanding of terminal and wound ballistics, factors other than the construction of a bullet dominate the bullet’s behaviour and its wounding effect. It has been suggested, therefore, that ‘adhering to the strict wording of the Declaration does not always achieve its apparent object and purpose, that is, to eliminate the unnecessary injury and suffering associated with very large bullet wounds.’R. Coupland, D. Loye, 'The 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets: A Treaty Effective for more than 100 Years Faces Complex Contemporary Issues', 85(849)(2003) International Review of the Red Cross,135.
It remains contested, however, what types of modern bullets comply with the letter and/or spirit of the 1899 Hague Declaration on expanding bullets, and disagreement persists about how compliance should best be assessed. Among bullets that have become the centre of controversy in relation to the prohibition on expanding bullets are:
Last updated on: 04 August 2017
‘The primary purpose of military rifle bullets is to disrupt human tissue’.M. L. Fackler, 'Wounding patterns of military rifle bullets', 1(1989) International Defence Review, 59. The effectiveness of a bullet can be defined as the amount of energy that the bullet makes available to the tissue during penetration.B. P. Kneubuehl, 'Small Caliber Weapon Systems', Report, ICRC Expert Meeting on Certain Weapon Systems and on Implementation Mechanisms in International Law, Geneva 30 May - 1 June 1994, 31. For a brief introduction to wound ballistics, see ICRC, Wound Ballistics: An Introduction for Health, Legal, Forensic, Military and Law Enforcement Professionals, (brochure and film), 2008; For a comprehensive discussion, see B. P. Kneubuehl (ed.), Wound Ballistics: Basics and Applications, Springer, 2011.
Bullets that deform or mushroom immediately upon entering a body transfer the kinetic energy of the bullet to the tissue of the target more quickly. Such bullets are less likely to ricochet or to exit or penetrate an object or a person and wound other persons in the vicinity of the target (over-penetration), or to cause damage to surrounding objects (this may be dangerous on board aircraft or in the presence of hazardous substances). Due to these factors, and because in some cases they are claimed to have greater accuracy over long distances (useful for sniping), bullets that expand within the target are considered especially suited for use in situations where the target is in close vicinity of bystanders, respectively civilians, such as in an urban environment or other populated area.
It should be noted that the development of bullets that expand in the human body is not only driven by the desire to achieve this terminal ballistic effect. It can also be the result of a desire to reduce the weight or size of bullets (and increase the number of rounds a soldier can carry), increase their range, increase the accuracy or decrease recoil on shooting.
Although frequently invoked, increased ‘stopping power’ of expanding bullets, compared to non-expanding bullets, and 'immediate incapacitation' of a suspected offender (or enemy soldier) are somewhat misleading justifications for the use of expanding bullets. Increased ‘stopping power’ and immediate incapacitation was the main justification advanced by British proponents of dumdum bullets in the nineteenth century. Today, the argument is often heard that the greater ‘stopping power’ of expanding bullets decreases the risk to bystanders, because the suspected offender is incapacitated more quickly and because law enforcement officials consequently have to fire fewer bullets.J. F. Berry, 'Hollow Point Bullets: How History has Hijacked their Use in Combat and Why it is Time to Reexamine the 1899 Hague Declaration concerning Expanding Bullets', 206(2010) Military Law Review, 132. However, the impulse of an ordinary rifle projectile, let alone that of a handgun bullet, does not transfer enough energy to a moving adult man to make him ‘stop’. Likewise, immediate incapacitation can only be achieved by disabling a suspected offender's central nervous system. For this purpose, relevant parts of the brain or of the upper spinal cord need to be wounded. Thus, a suspected offender can only reliably be incapacitated with immediate effect through the infliction of injury that is most likely fatal. Whether this is done with a bullet that expands in the human body is of secondary importance.On this topic, M. A. Rothschild, B. P. Kneubuehl, 'Irrtümer der Wundballistik', 20(2010) Rechtsmedizin, 88-9. Di Maio notes: 'What police agencies desire is a pistol cartridge that will stop a person "dead in his tracks." There is no such cartridge and there never will be.' V. J. M. Di Maio, Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques, CRC Press, 1985, 309.
‘Bullets wound by crushing, lacerating or displacing body tissue. The extent of wounding depends on factors such as energy transfer and wounding profile (i.e. the path and depth of penetration). Compared to wholly lead bullets of the eighteenth and nineteenth century, late-nineteenth-century fully jacketed bullets were stable and non-deforming. Their wounding potential was reduced unless high-density organs or bone were struck.M. J. Iremonger, P. J. Hazell, 'Influence of Small Arms Bullet Construction on Terminal Ballistics', 21st International Symposium on Ballistics, 2004, at 767.
Against this background, Professor von Bruns, a German Surgeon General, found that bullets which he believed to be similar to the British dumdum bullet had a higher propensity to shatter bones and inflict large wounds in soft tissue, causing ‘inhumane’ injuries.A. Ogston, 'The Peace Conference and the Dum-Dum Bullet', British Medical Journal, 29 July 1899, 278. Professor Bruns also experimented with the hollow-pointed Woolwich bullet, and found that, although it did not lose its shape as readily as bullets with an exposed leaden nose (such as the dumdum bullet), it still expanded and flew into pieces, producing much more severe injuries than fully-mantled bullets, and enormous destruction in cavities containing liquids, such as the heart and bladder, when striking at short distances.A. Ogston, 'Continental Criticism of English Rifle Bullets', British Medical Journal, 25 March 1899, 753.
The key factors causing the severe wounds observed in relation to expanding bullets were at the time seen to be the expansion of the bullet through mushrooming or disintegration (fragmentation). It was believed that surgery available at the time was powerless to attenuate these ‘truly barbarous wounds’, which were likely to result in death or mutilation of the victim. ‘There would be no help for it but to amputate the limbs of such of the wounded as had not bled to death from the extensive wounds of the soft parts.’Professor Esmachr’s Appeal cited in A. Ogston, 'Continental Criticism of English Rifle Bullets', British Medical Journal, 25 March 1899, 754.
Churchill wrote about the Dum-Dum bullet: ‘On striking a bone this causes the bullet to "set up" or spread out, and it then tears and splinters everything before it, causing wounds which in the body must be generally mortal and in any limb necessitate amputation.’ He and others considered that ‘these bullets do their duty most effectually, without causing any more pain to those struck by them, than the ordinary lead variety’.The Story of the Malakand Field Force: An Episode of Frontier War, Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1916, 326-7. Dumdum bullets were also used against British troops in the Frontier campaigns, by tribesmen who had captured a large quantity of British ammunition. This afforded British soldiers with the opportunity to experience the bullets’ effects for themselves. Churchill wrote (presumably not from first-hand experience): 'The sensation is described as similar to that produced by any bullet—a violent numbing blow, followed by a sense of injury and weakness, but little actual pain at the time. Indeed, now-a-days, very few people are so unfortunate as to suffer much pain from wounds, except during the period of recovery. A man is hit. In a quarter of an hour, that is to say, before the shock has passed away and the pain begins, he is usually at the dressing station. Here he is given morphia injections, which reduce all sensations to a uniform dullness. In this state he remains until he is placed under chloroform and operated on.' Churchill does not say whether wounded ‘savages’ were also afforded such prompt and competent medical care.
It was disputed at the time whether the wounding effects of expanding bullets of the dumdum type were really more serious and all that different from bullets that did not fall within the purview of the 1899 Hague Declaration. The high velocity of bullets, their weight, and the range from which they were fired were identified as important factors to consider, independent of whether the projectiles were fully jacketed or not.A. Ogston, 'The Peace Conference and the Dum-Dum Bullet', British Medical Journal, 29 July 1899, 279-80. Concerns about permanent disability and high mortality were, for instance, raised in relation to the US Navy rifle, M1895 (‘Lee straight pull rifle’), a rapid-fire, small-bore rifle. Experiments with a fully jacketed 122 grain bullet showed that ‘the injuries produced by the highest velocities are simply terrible’ and that, as the projectile often goes to pieces, ‘amputations will have to be done more frequently’ and ‘mortality will be higher’.Experiments by Beyer, cited in A. Ogston, 'Continental Criticism of English Rifle Bullets', British Medical Journal, 25 March 1899,756–7.
According to a modern understanding of wound ballistics, the transfer of kinetic energy from the projectile to the tissues along the projectile’s track is the most important impact quantity for the motion of a bullet inside the body. This ‘down-track’ deposit of energy is determined principally by the mass and velocity of the bullet and by its construction and stability in flight.Gyroscopic stability depends on such factors as the rate of spin, the moments of inertia, and the geometry of the bullet. ‘In general, the greater the gyroscopic stability of a bullet (for example, because of a higher spin rate), the further it will go in the body before starting to tumble; and the shorter the bullet is in relation to its diameter, the less likely it is to tumble).’ (E.Prokosch, 'The Swiss draft Protocol on Small-Calibre Weapon Systems', 307(1995) International Review of the Red Cross). The rate with which energy is transferred determines the amount of tissue damage.R. Coupland et al. 'Wound ballistics, surgery and the law of war', 2(1)(2000) Trauma, 1. Each bullet has a characteristic energy profile that shows the wounding capacity of the bullet along the whole penetration path. Deforming and fragmentation bullets (generally semi-jacketed or hollow-point bullets) tend to cause a temporary cavity and deform or fragment early after penetration.B. P. Kneubuehl (ed.), Wound Ballistics: Basics and Applications, Springer, 2011, 101. Despite their full metal jacket and spin stabilization, some modern rifle bullets (that are very different in construction from the British dumdum bullet of the nineteenth century) have high wounding potential because they can yaw and tumble early upon entry, causing extensive tissue damage. They may also fragment, which significantly increases their wounding effect. M. J. Iremonger, P. J. Hazell, 'Influence of Small Arms Bullet Construction on Terminal Ballistics', 21st International Symposium on Ballistics, 2004, at 767.
Last updated on: 04 August 2017
The 1899 Hague Declaration concerning expanding bullets prohibits the use, as a means of warfare, of ‘bullets which expand or flatten easily in the human body’. The prohibition was introduced mostly with a view to ban the British-made ‘dumdum’ bullet.
+ More