"In the midst of armed conflict, let us not forget that the preservation of human life should

always be our guiding light, for every life lost is a tragedy that echoes through generations."
We, the prosecution team, strongly stands with the preservation of human lives even during the
time of armed conflict.
To our panelists, judges, co-speakers, oppositors (?), classmates,
Good morning!
We, from the prosecution, charges Mr. Liet Kynes, the leader of Red Eagles who was formerly
an outspoken and well-respected leader of the True Freman Movement , of violation against the
International Humanitarian Law for unlawfully killing 25 RIF medical officers attached to RIF
patrols across the country. Such killing is clearly and undoubtedly PROHIBITED under the IHL.

The prosecution supports its claim on the following grounds :

First Argument :
Medical Officers are protected under the IHL.
Killing of medical officers during armed conflicts is prohibited under the International
Humanitarian Law (IHL). Medical officers, as well as other medical personnel, are considered
protected persons under IHL. The primary aim of this protection is to ensure the provision of
medical care to the wounded and sick, without discrimination, and to safeguard the impartiality
and neutrality of medical services.

Attacks against medical personnel, facilities, and transports are strictly prohibited.
It was already established that on 4 January 2016, the TFRA claimed responsibility on social
media for the killing of an RIF medical officer in the east Ravis and posted alleged to depict go-
pills in a pool of blood. Over the next 6 months, the TFRA killed 25 RIF medical officers
attached to RIF in the country. In five cases, the medical officer was the only fatality in the
attack. CLEARLY, such act is a violation of the IHL. Hence, Mr. Liet Kynes should be held
liable.

Second Argument :
Mr. Liet Kynes lacks valid ground to justify the unlawful killing of the medical officers. It is a
violation of the IHL.
The use of "go-pills," or stimulants, medical officers may potentially breach medical protection
if it violates regulations or policies set by the respective medical governing bodies or military
branches. It is important for medical officers to adhere to the established rules and guidelines
regarding medication use, and consult with their superiors or legal advisors if they have any
concerns about potential breaches.
In this case, there was no showing that the use of go-pills or stimulants violates the regulations
and policies by the respective governing bodies. In fact, Shaddam II approved the use of
“pharmacological fatigue countermeasures” to enhance the performance of his troops under
these conditions.
Despite lack of clear breach of the medical officers of the use of go-pills, Mr Liet Kynes
continued with the killing of the medical officers. Such act was premature and unjustified.
Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that there was breach of regulations, they (the medical
officers) are not automatically be excluded in the ambit of protection under the International
Humanitarian Law.
As clearly settled, Medical officers may be excluded from the protection under International
Humanitarian Law (IHL) in certain instances, particularly if they engage in activities that go
beyond their recognized medical functions, such as:

1. Direct participation in hostilities: If a medical officer directly participates in hostilities by

taking up arms, engaging in combat, or engaging in military operations, they may lose their
protection as a medical officer under IHL.

2. Abuse of medical facilities or equipment: If a medical officer uses medical facilities or

equipment for non-medical purposes, such as storing weapons or ammunition, they may be
excluded from protection under IHL.

3. Complicity in war crimes or crimes against humanity: If a medical officer is involved in or

complicit in war crimes, crimes against humanity, or other grave violations of IHL, they may
lose their protection and may be subject to criminal prosecution.
The abovementioned were not present and was not even proved in this case. Thus, Mr. Liet
Kynes’ act of killing the medical officers is a violation of the IHL.

Third Argument :
War crimes are acts that violate the laws and customs of war and are considered to be serious
offenses. They are typically committed during armed conflicts and include actions such as
deliberate targeting of civilians, torture, mass killings, sexual violence, forced displacement of
populations, and the use of prohibited weapons. War crimes are considered to be a violation of
international humanitarian law and those responsible may be held accountable by national or
international courts.
As settled, war crime occurs when there exists a serious violation of the laws and customs of
war, typically committed during armed conflict. These crimes are considered to be among the
most severe offenses, as they involve deliberate acts targeting civilians, prisoners of war, or
other protected individuals or objects. The common elements of war crimes are as follows:
1. The victims are protected under one or more of the GC 1949
2. Perpetrator was aware of the factual circumstances that established that protected status;
3. The conduct took place in the context of and was associated with IAC or NIAC
4. Perpetrator was aware of factual circumstance that established the existence of an armed conflict PLUS War
Crimes under Section 4 (b): NIAC

In the given scenario, all the common elements of war crimes are present.
First, the victims were medical officers. Medical Officers are protected individuals pursuant to
the Geneva Convention and Additional Protocol. The Perpetrator, Liet Kynes, was well aware
that the medical officers are protected under the IHL but killed them despite such fact and such
killing were conducted during the existence of NIAC.
The prosecution stands that Mr. Leit Kyne’s should be held liable under the ICC.
Consequently, the consequences of war crimes can vary depending on the situation and the
jurisdiction involved. Here are some possible outcomes:

1. International Criminal Court (ICC): If the war crime occurs within the jurisdiction of the ICC,
which has authority over war crimes committed by individuals from countries that have ratified
the ICC's Rome Statute, the court can investigate, prosecute, and try those responsible.

2. International Criminal Tribunals: In cases where ad hoc international criminal tribunals are
established, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) or the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the responsible individuals can be
prosecuted and tried before these tribunals.

3. National Prosecution: Countries

Considering all the foregoing, we (the prosecution) is filing a charge against Mr. Liet Kynes on
violation of IHL in relation to war crimes committed during the Raveen Conflict.
To repeat, the prosecution stands that "In the midst of armed conflict, let us not forget that the
preservation of human life should always be our guiding light, for every life lost is a tragedy that
echoes through generations."