62 145. In the light of the above discussion, the following conclusion may be safely reached. In the case at issue, given that the Bosnian Serb armed forces constituted a “military organization”, the control of the FRY authorities over these armed forces required by international law for considering the armed conflict to be international was overall control going beyond the mere financing and equipping of such forces and involving also participation in the planning and supervision of military operations. By contrast, international rules do not require that such control should extend to the issuance of specific orders or instructions relating to single military actions, whether or not such actions were contrary to international humanitarian law. 4. The Factual Relationship Between the Bosnian Serb Army and the Army of the FRY 146. The Appeals Chamber has concluded that in general international law, three tests may be applied for determining whether an individual is acting as a de facto State organ. In the case of individuals forming part of armed forces or military units, as in the case of any other hierarchically organised group, the test is that of overall control by the State. 147. It now falls to the Appeals Chamber to establish whether, in the circumstances of the case, the Yugoslav Army exercised in 1992 the requisite measure of control over the Bosnian Serb Army. The answer must be in the affirmative. 148. The Appeals Chamber does not see any ground for overturning the factual findings made in this case by the Trial Chamber and relies on the facts as stated in the Judgement. The majority and Judge McDonald do not appear to disagree on the facts, which Judge McDonald also takes as stated in the Judgement, 176 but only on the legal interpretation to be given to those facts. 149. Since, however, the Appeals Chamber considers that the Trial Chamber applied an incorrect standard in evaluating the legal consequences of the relationship between the FRY Although these cases concerned State responsibility, they may be relevant to the question of the criminal responsibility of individuals perpetrating grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, inasmuch as they set out the conditions necessary for individuals to be considered as de facto State organs. 176 See Separate and Dissenting Opinion of Judge McDonald, para. 1: “I completely agree with and share in the Opinion and Judgment with the exception of the determination that Article 2 of the Statute is inapplicable to the charges against the accused.” Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999