Why is the hospital a cross symbol

The Red Cross symbol has the following main meanings and functions: --Indicates that this is a person and object associated with the Red Cross Movement (indicative). --Indicates that this is a person and thing protected by international humanitarian law (protective). --Indicates that this is a person and object that should not be attacked (protective). Persons and objects bearing this symbol have both rights and obligations under the law. The right is to be protected by a set of laws, and the obligation is to comply with the restrictions on their behavior imposed by the sign and to refrain from actively participating in any hostile act. This dual role of the emblem in the eyes of the law determines the sacred nature of the emblem. The design and colors of this emblem are both simple and distinctive, and are intended to give a very clear visual symbol so that, in an emergency situation, the above message can be conveyed quickly and be understood quickly and without ambiguity. This is because it is primarily useful in situations of armed conflict. W%[;o This emblem does not convey any message other than that which it purports to convey, still less any message characterized by political ideology or religion. The International Commission for the Relief of the Wounded and Soldiers, established in Geneva in February 1863, considered that, in view of the specificity of battlefield relief work, and in order to enable the war-wounded to receive relief without discrimination, it was necessary to adopt a sign of a simple form, readily recognizable, easily identifiable, and understandable by all, to identify the personnel, vehicles, and buildings that were used to carry out medical treatment and relief activities in wartime; and Considers that the particulars of this emblem and of its use should be fixed in the form of an international convention, in order to ensure that the parties to the conflict will respect and protect the persons who wear it. Thus, at the International Conference of Geneva in October 1863, several members of the Commission proposed a motion to adopt the white armband bearing the Red Cross as a protective emblem for medical personnel. It is not sufficiently clear from the historical sources, however, whether this emblem was adopted as a tribute to the Swiss State (since the movement for the relief of the wounded was born in that country), or because it was inspired by the white flag recognized by the international community as signifying a cease-fire (the addition of a red cross was intended to avoid confusion), or perhaps it was a combination of the two ideas mentioned above. Whatever the reason at the time, the States participating in the first international humanitarian conference agreed to adopt the Red Cross emblem as the protective emblem for all those involved in wartime medical and relief activities, in what would become known as the Geneva Conventions of August 1864 to improve the situation of wounded military personnel on land battlefields. The ICRC, and indeed the Red Cross movement as a whole, soon became known as such, generating enormous moral force and legal effect, and gathering all kinds of people under its banner. It is important to note here that the choice of the Red Cross design was quite fortuitous, and that it was not given any religious significance by those who determined that it should be chosen in the first place. As The Principles and Problems of the Red Cross by M. Huber puts it, "Neither Henri Dunant himself, nor his collaborators, nor the States participating in the Geneva Conference intended to give the Red Cross Movement and the Red Cross emblem any religious stamp, or to associate it in any way with a philosophical idea." This is what characterizes the Red Cross Movement. Origin of the Red Crescent Emblem: The principle that the Geneva Conventions, signed by the International Conference in August 1864, established the use of the Red Cross on a white background as a protective emblem for all nations was challenged at the outbreak of the 1876-1878 war between Russia and Turkey. The Turkish Ottoman authorities informed the ICRC that it would adopt the Red Crescent (instead of the Red Cross) to mark its own ambulance vehicles, but that it would still respect the Red Cross emblem protecting enemy ambulance vehicles, on the grounds that "...... 'Red Cross' ' is a blasphemy against Muslim soldiers." And implicitly, "It cannot force its own forces to respect the Geneva Conventions if its proposed changes are not accepted." Such a unilateral change to the provisions of Article 9 of the 1864 Geneva Conventions is a breach of the unity of the Red Cross movement and could cause confusion among the public and be counterproductive to the humanitarian work promoted by the Geneva Conventions. The ICRC could not agree. However, the war was going on, and in view of the urgency of assisting the wounded, the ICRC offered to accept the Red Crescent emblem on a temporary basis, with the subsequent termination of its use at the end of the war. Contrary to the ICRC's wishes, the Russo-Turkish War ended without the cessation of the Red Crescent Emblem, and this unfortunate precedent was soon followed by a new challenge to the unity of the Red Cross emblem: when the Peace Conference at The Hague in 1899 was drafting a convention on the application of the principles of the Geneva Conventions of 1864 to wars at sea, the delegates of the State of Persia, now Iran, proposed to adopt another protective emblem - the "Red Crescent" - to be applied to the wars at sea. protective symbol - "Red Lion Day (Red Lion and Sun)". A very difficult problem arose, namely the contradiction between the unity of the Red Cross Movement and the diversity of the Red Cross emblems. An initial compromise solution to this problem was reached at the Diplomatic Conference of 1929, when a new article (article 19) was written into the Geneva Conventions reaffirming, on the one hand, that the Red Cross emblem is not religious in any way, and, on the other hand, formally recognizing the Red Crescent and the Red Lion Day emblems as legally valid, but restricting them to use only in those countries that had already adopted them. The Conference also specified that no new emblems would be recognized in the future. However, the conflict over the emblems persisted. At the 1949 Diplomatic Conference, the following motions were put forward: - to adopt a new uniform emblem; - to restore the original uniform Red Cross emblem; - for Israel to recognize the new emblem: the Red Cross of David. demanded that the new emblem be recognized: the Red Shield of David. This is the special emblem used by the medical services of the Israeli army. After a long debate, none of the above proposals were adopted. It was decided to retain the compromise approach adopted by the 1929 Conference. As a result, there were three emblems for some time: the Red Cross, the Red Crescent, and the Red Lion Day. It was not until September 1980 that the Islamic*** Republic of Iran announced the abolition of the Red Lion Day emblem and the adoption of the Red Crescent emblem for the medical services of its armed forces, thus reverting to the previous state of affairs in which there were only two emblems: the Red Cross and the Red Crescent. In view of this situation, at the Twenty-fifth International Conference of the Red Cross, held in Geneva in 1986, the International Red Cross Statutes were renamed the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Statutes; thus, the Red Crescent acquired equal status with the Red Cross and became a specific emblem of the medical services of the armies of a number of countries practicing Islam, as well as the emblem of the Red Crescent societies of these countries, reaffirming that the Red Cross and Red Crescent emblems are not of any religious character. any religious character. Among international organizations, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies is the only one that can use both emblems (Red Cross and Red Crescent). The International Committee of the Red Cross continues to use the Red Cross as its only emblem. The ICRC still uses the Red Cross as its only emblem. After its own historical development and changes, the system of the Red Cross emblem has a solid legal status in today's world, based on the following three sets of regulations and principles: 1. International humanitarian law (IHL) The IHL consists of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the two Additional Protocols of 1977, which are all international treaties. These six documents are all international treaties that explicitly recognize that the use of the Red Cross, Red Crescent and Red Lion Day emblems has the force of international law. They cannot be modified without the unanimous consent of the signatory States. That is to say, this emblem, fixed by treaty, guarantees the protection of the three emblems from infringement through the form of international law. It is worthwhile and important to note that the Geneva Conventions as amended in 1949 deliberately placed considerable restrictions on the use of the Red Crescent and Red Lion Day emblems, permitting them to be used only by those States which had adopted them before 1949, and opposing their use by other States after 1949. It was reaffirmed that the Red Cross remains the recognized emblem (indeed, as noted in the previous section, in September 1980, Iran announced the abolition of the Red Lion Day emblem in favour of the Red Crescent). There are currently 30 Red Crescent emblem States*** and 145 Red Cross emblem States in the world. The second legal basis which determines the use of the system of emblems is the ICRC's own regulations. The most important of these regulations is the Rules for the Use of the Red Cross or Red Crescent Symbol to be Observed by All Agencies Concerned in Each State. This document was adopted by the 21st International Conference of the Red Cross in Vienna in 1965 and unanimously agreed to by the delegates of the signatories of the Geneva Conventions, and therefore has the legal effect of being recognized by the States. The third legal basis of the emblem is the universal applicability of the protective purpose and function of the emblem. Since the founding of the Red Cross Movement, the protective emblem has continuously played an active role in achieving the noble purposes of the Red Cross. For more than one hundred and thirty years, the Red Cross emblem has been seen worldwide as a symbol of help, protection, shelter and relief for people in distress, and has gained universal recognition on a wider scale, culminating in the recognition of its use at the international level, with its role of legal protection. It can be said that this universal use and universal recognition of the emblem is a powerful complement to the legal basis of the sign. Combined with international humanitarian law and the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement as a whole is more distinctive, becoming a coherent and complete system that reflects both its internal and external aspects. In order to ensure that the role of the emblem is properly and fully realized, international law also determines the sanctions to be imposed for the use of the emblem in violation of its provisions. This further illustrates the legal status of the emblem. The 1949 Geneva Conventions (Article 54 of Convention I) expressly prohibit the misuse and abuse of this emblem. The signatory States are required to enact a domestic law specifically clarifying this international obligation to which compliance is mandatory. Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions, adopted by the Geneva Diplomatic Conference in 1977, takes this obligation a step further by characterizing the intentional misuse of the Red Cross and Red Crescent emblem in violation of its provisions, resulting in death, injury or damage to health, as a war crime under international law. At the same time, the misuse of protective symbols and the misuse of indicative symbols are defined. IV. Use of the emblem In accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (Convention I) and the Additional Protocols of 1977 (Protocol I), the emblems are used in the following specific ways: - Protective use As a protective emblem, it is a symbol representing the Geneva Conventions in time of war, and it is a symbol which is used in accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Conventions for the purpose of providing assistance to persons and objects (medical personnel, medical services, vehicles and equipment) under the Geneva Conventions. The right to use it belongs essentially to the signatory States and the medical services of their armed forces, as well as to relief agencies officially recognized as providing assistance to the medical services of the armed forces and, in particular, to the national Red Cross or Red Crescent societies, which may use this protective emblem. However, it may be used only in time of war and must be marked in accordance with the instructions of the military authorities. The international organizations of the Red Cross, namely the International Committee of the Red Cross and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and their personnel, whether they are medical personnel or not, are entitled to use this emblem in all circumstances. When it is used as a protective emblem, it should be of a larger size on the building or vehicle on which it is displayed, so that it can be seen from a distance, for example, on the roofs of hospitals, on the decks and sides of medical ships, and around the perimeters and on the roofs of vehicles transporting the wounded and medical personnel. Medical personnel are required to wear long smocks or armbands bearing this symbol. --As an indicative emblem, it merely indicates that the person or thing bearing it has some connection with the Red Cross or Red Crescent, but is not necessarily protected by the Geneva Conventions. It is therefore also relatively small in size and should be used in such a way as to avoid, to some extent, confusion with the Protective Sign. However, it is not always possible to use larger sizes; for example, in the context of disaster relief activities, it is necessary to use larger sizes in order to make first-aiders clearly recognizable. Generally speaking, in times of peace, national Red Cross or Red Crescent societies could use the emblem as a distinctive sign, subject to their national laws. In time of war, they may continue to use it as an indicative sign, provided that it does not give rise to confusion that could lead people to mistake it for a protective sign. National Red Cross or Red Crescent Societies may not make use of the emblem for activities contrary to the principles and purposes laid down by the International Conference of the Red Cross. The so-called indicative signs generally refer to the following: ① Subsidiary Signs - they may be used on flags, signs with addresses, automobile license plates, staff badges, etc., to indicate that a person or thing belongs to a National Red Cross or Red Crescent Society. ② Decorative Emblem - it may be used on medals, awards and other prizes, publications or decorative drawings issued by National Red Cross or Red Crescent Societies. (iii) The Associated Symbol - it can be used on first aid stations, alongside roads, in stadiums or on other public **** facilities and on ambulances providing free medical treatment to sick and injured civilians. Finally, a word on the treatment of improper use of the emblem. Since the Red Cross and Red Crescent emblem is largely perceived as a symbol of relief, it is often widely used by organizations and individuals who have no connection with the Red Cross Movement. These organizations and individuals include hospitals, private medical practitioners, ambulances, medical stores, manufacturers and distributors of medicines, as well as entities and individuals concerned with health care. In practice, the use of the emblem without the official authorization of a national Red Cross or Red Crescent society should be regarded as misuse, whatever the purpose. All Signatory States must adopt effective legal means to restrict and penalize the misuse or abuse of the Emblem. Experience has amply demonstrated that misuse of the emblem, even in isolated cases, inevitably leads to a diminution of the authority of the emblem and to the denial of due protection to those entitled to it. It is therefore an important task for national Red Cross or Red Crescent societies to publicize and defend the proper use of the Emblem, both in times of peace and in times of war.