This article analyses how international criminal courts and tribunals have pronounced on the contextual elements of their respective war crimes provisions. A comprehensive overview of the way these institutions treated the material scope of application of ihl shows that the ad hoc tribunals tended to avoid classification as either international or non-international armed conflict​, and merely found that a generic ‘armed conflict’ existed at the relevant​ time. The icc shows a tendency to classify situations as non-international armed conflicts without considering whether the situation concerned may instead (or at the same time) qualify as an international armed conflict. Non-international​ armed conflict is often, mistakenly, treated as a residual regime. Incorrect conflict classification may​ affect ihl’s scope of application, and negatively impact on an accused’s fair trial​ rights under international criminal law. The author proposes a fresh look at the​ icc’s legal framework to solve conflict classification​ problems.

本文分析了国际刑事法院和法庭如何就其各自的战争罪规定的上下文要素发表意见。这些机构处理国际人道法的实质性适用范围的方式的全面概述表明，特设法庭倾向于避免将其归类为国际或非国际武装冲突，而只是发现特设法庭存在普遍的``武装冲突''。相关时间 在国际刑事法院表现出将局势分类为非国际性武装冲突的趋势，而不考虑有关局势是否可以代替（或同时）符合国际武装冲突的条件。非国际性武装冲突经常被错误地视为残余制度。不正确的冲突分类可能会影响ihl的适用范围，并对国际刑法规定的被告的公平审判权产生负面影响。笔者提出了一个重新审视国际刑事法院的法律框架，以解决冲突的分类问题。