|Appeal Judgement - 12.11.2009||
264. […] In any case, his argument that the attack against Hrasnica could be legitimate as it anticipated concrete and direct military advantage must fail because, due to its disproportionate and indiscriminate nature, it was unlawfully directed against the civilian population in the area. […]
 Strugar Appeal Judgement, para. 179, referring to Additional Protocol I, Articles 51(5)(b), 57(2)(a)(iii) and 57(2)(b); Galić Trial Judgement, para. 58 (and sources cited therein); Galić Appeal Judgement, paras 191-192.
 See supra, Section VII.B, para. 142. As consistently held by the Appeals Chamber, “whether an attack was ordered as pre-emptive, defensive or offensive is from a legal point of view irrelevant […]. The issue at hand is whether the way the military action was carried out was criminal or not.” (Martić Appeal Judgement, para. 268, quoting Kordić and Čerkez Appeal Judgement, para. 812). See also supra, para. 250.