Emily and Nicole discuss how non-binding instruments or ‘soft law’ have been received in international humanitarian law by looking at specific examples, such as the ICRC Study into Customary International Humanitarian Law. Have they been adopted in state practice? Are they referred to by international and national courts and tribunals? They consider potential benefits, such as their potential to contribute in a positive way to the development and clarification of the law, but also the possible pitfalls – lack of accountability and transparency and bias.  And what legal status, if any, do they have?