23. The Appeals Chamber notes that the Trial Chamber did not establish the nature of the armed conflict concerned by the Indictment.[1] Given that the Indictment charged Milošević under Article 51(2) of Additional Protocol I and, in the alternative, Article 13(2) of Additional Protocol II, the Trial Judgement cites to both Protocols without specifying which of them applies to the conflict at issue. Although the Appeals Chamber considers that the Trial Chamber should have made a clear finding as to the nature of the armed conflict or the applicability of the Additional Protocols,[2] the Appeals Chamber finds the references to the relevant provisions of both Additional Protocols permissible given that they form part of customary international law and apply both in international and internal armed conflicts.[3] The Appeals Chamber further notes that the Trial Chamber referred to Additional Protocol I, notably in defining the notion of “civilians”.[4] It recalls in this respect that the definition of civilians contained in Article 50 of Additional Protocol I applies to crimes under both Article 3 and Article 5 of the Statute,[5] and finds that, provided that the direct participation in hostilities is adequately taken into account,[6] the application of this definition is appropriate in this case.[7] Additionally, the Appeals Chamber notes that Additional Protocol I was incorporated into Yugoslavia’s Armed Forces Regulations on the Application of the International Laws of War.[8]