SC Res. 1998, 12 July 2011, para. 4.

 Pfeiffer & Mohammed, supra note 7; ‘Tensions Heighten’, supra note 7.

 HRW, ‘AU Should Press Gbagbo to Halt Abuses’, supra note 7; OCHA, ‘Cote d’Ivoire Situation Report #8’, supra note 7; OCHA, ‘Cote d’Ivoire Situation Report #9’, supra note 7; UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict, A/61/529–S/2006/826, 26 October 2006, para. 26.

 HRW, ‘AU Should Press Gbagbo to Halt Abuses’, supra note 7; OCHA, ‘Cote d’Ivoire Situation Report #8’, supra note 7; OCHA, ‘Cote d’Ivoire Situation Report #9’, supra note 7; UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict, A/61/529–S/2006/826, 26 October 2006, para. 26.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See AP I, supra note 36, arts. 48 and 51(2); Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (1977), 1125 UNTS 605 (entered into force 7 December 1978) [hereinafter AP II], art. 13(2); see alsocihl,supra note 35, rule 1. International humanitarian law, including the principle of distinction, also binds non-state armed groups. For further discussion, see cihl, supra note 35, at 497-98.

 See, e.g., HRW, ‘Targets of Both Sides’, supra note 7, at 66, Figure 3 (watchtower built by paramilitary Rangers at Ban Paka Cinoa Elementary School, in Nong Chik district, Pattani, Thailand).

 See, e.g., HRW, ‘Targets of Both Sides’, supra note 7, at 66, Figure 3 (watchtower built by paramilitary Rangers at Ban Paka Cinoa Elementary School, in Nong Chik district, Pattani, Thailand).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See, e.g., HRW, ‘Sabotaged Schooling’, supra note 7, at 57, Figure 4 (an armed paramilitary police sentry surveys the surroundings from inside the brick fortification on the roof of Matiabandhi High School, Jharkhand, India).

 See, e.g., HRW, ‘Sabotaged Schooling’, supra note 7, at 57, Figure 4 (an armed paramilitary police sentry surveys the surroundings from inside the brick fortification on the roof of Matiabandhi High School, Jharkhand, India).)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See, e.g., Ellick, supra note 7.

 Between December 2008 and June 2011, schools were attacked in Afghanistan, Burma, the Central African Republic, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of Congo, India, Iraq, Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Libya, Pakistan, the Philippines, Somalia, Sudan, Thailand, and Yemen. HRW, ‘Schools and Armed Conflict: A Global Survey of Domestic Laws and State Practice’, July 2011, at 8.

 For instance, on 7 March 2006, Colombian army troops took up positions inside the Ecological School at Cuembí in Puerto Asís, Putumayo. When the FARC-EP announced their intention to attack, 30 families from the village of La Carmelita fled their homes. UNHCHR, Situation of Human Rights in Colombia, A/HRC/4/48, 5 March 2007, para. 77.

 S.S. Shahzad, ‘Swat Valley: Whose War is This?’ Asia Times, 31 January 2009, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KA31Df01.html.

 S.S. Shahzad, ‘Swat Valley: Whose War is This?’ Asia Times, 31 January 2009, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KA31Df01.html.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 In June 2008, the FARC-EP launched explosives into a school in the municipality of Puerto Asís, Putumayo, Colombia. In the days prior, army personnel had camped in the school premises. UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict in Colombia, S/2009/434, 28 August 2009, para. 44. On 25 October 2007, Maoists blew up a school building in Sobaranpur, Jharkhand. The Superintendent of Police said Maoists destroyed the school as security personnel had often used it for overnight shelter. ‘Maoists Destroy School Building in Jharkhand’, The Times of India, 25 October 2007, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2007-10-25/india/27966491_1_school-building-maoists-jharkhand.

 See AP I, supra note 36, art. 58(c); AP II, supra note 39, art. 13(1) (“The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against the dangers arising from military operations”); see also cihl, supra note 35, rules 22 & 24; Judgment, Prosecutor v. Kupreškić, No. IT-95-16-T, ICTY, 14 January 2000, para. 524 (finding AP I, Article 58 part of “customary international law, not only because [it] specif[ies] and flesh[es] out general pre-existing norms, but also because [it] do[es] not appear to be contested by any State, including those which have not ratified the Protocol”).

 See AP I, supra note 36, art. 58(a); see also cihl, supra note 35, rule 24.

 Bart, supra note 42, at 429.

 HRW, ‘No Place for Children’, supra note 7.

 HRW, ‘No Place for Children’, supra note 7.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 See Bart, supra note 42.

 Forrest, supra note 78, at 179.

 Hague Convention IV, supra note 87. Paragraph 8 of the preamble also provides: Until a more complete code of the laws of war has been issued, the High Contracting Parties deem it expedient to declare that, in cases not included in the Regulations adopted by them, the inhabitants and the belligerents remain under the protection and the rule of the principles of the law of nations, as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and the dictates of the public conscience.This clause also appears in various forms in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 as well as other international humanitarian law treaties.

 Forrest, supra note 78, at 182.

 Venturini, supra note 86, at 49. This reflects the general principle of international humanitarian law, as articulated by AP I, article 35, that, “[i]n any armed conflict, the right of the Parties to the conflict to choose methods or means of warfare is not unlimited”.

 GC IV, supra note 67, art. 50.

 AP II, supra note 39, art. 4(3)(a).

 ICESCR, supra note 100, art. 4.

 See CRC, supra note 101, art. 28(a); ICESCR, supra note 100, art. 13(a).

 See CESCR, supra note 106, para. 44 (“Progressive realization means that States parties have a specific and continuing obligation “to move as expeditiously and effectively as possible” towards the full realization of article 13”).

 On 30 March 2006, the 891st Battalion of FARDC occupied the courtyard of the primary school in Mbau, Beni territory, DRC, burnt school doors and desks as firewood, used classrooms as toilets, and looted stationery and other learning materials. UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, S/2006/389 13 June 2006, para. 36. When FARDC soldiers (6th Brigade) occupied the elementary school in Laudjo, Ituri, DRC, for one week in January 2007, they burnt all of the school’s furniture as fuel for heating. UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, S/2007/391, 28 June 2007, para. 52.

 During 2002 and 2003, five primary schools in Lira district, Uganda, were occupied by the Lord’s Resistance Army. As of March 2007, although these schools had not been occupied for more than three years, unexploded ordnance and landmines prevented children from returning. UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict in Uganda, S/2007/260, 7 May 2007, para. 29.

 IDMC & Watchlist, ‘An Uncertain Future’, supra note 7, at 27.

 IDMC & Watchlist, ‘An Uncertain Future’, supra note 7, at 27.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 In 2003, the Groupe des patriotes pour la paix (GPP), a pro-government militia, occupied l’Institut de formation d’education feminine, a vocational training center for girls in Adjamé, Côte d’Ivoire. The occupation continued until government forces evicted the GPP and took over the premises in 2005. The Center served as a military base through at least 2006. UNSG, Children and Armed Conflict, A/61/529–S/2006/826, 26 October 2006, para. 18.

 IDMC & Watchlist, ‘An Uncertain Future’, supra note 7, at 27.

 IDMC & Watchlist, ‘An Uncertain Future’, supra note 7, at 27.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 P. Okino, ‘Uganda: Army Builds School in Otuke’, New Vision, 29 March 2010, http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/16/714528.

 P. Okino, ‘Uganda: Army Builds School in Otuke’, New Vision, 29 March 2010, http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/16/714528.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 IDMC & Watchlist, ‘An Uncertain Future’, supra note 7, at 27.

 IDMC & Watchlist, ‘An Uncertain Future’, supra note 7, at 27.)| false
• Search Google Scholar
• Export Citation

 In November 2001, the Indian Supreme Court ordered the government to provide a mid-day meal to children in government assisted primary schools (Order, People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition (Civil) No. 196 (2001), 28 November 2001), but police occupations of schools have interrupted this service. For instance, after police occupied the Bhita Ramda Middle School, displaced students were not provided a daily meal at the temporary school location. Site visit, East Singhbhum, Jharkhand, India, 31 May 2009.

 Draft Manual, supra note 186.

 Commentary, supra note 188.