Third Geneva Convention's Proliferation To Treat Prisoners Of War

Decent Essays

Looking further into this document, we will look at how member states who have signed this treaty are obliged to treat prisoners of war. How this treaty is enforced and the effectiveness of the enforcement as well as how this treaty has been upheld and looked at over the decades that it has been in effect will be analyzed. Failings by some countries in upholding the principles of this treaty will be discussed as well. The third Geneva Convention very specifically lists how you must treat Prisoners of War. This convention first broadened who actually were POWs according to Geneva Conventions I and II. Citizens who are interred were now given the same rights and rules regarding their treatment as military POWs. Weather “interned in this country; …show more content…

“Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces; Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;(c) That of carrying arms openly;(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war; Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power; Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany, who shall provide them for that purpose with an identity card similar to the annexed model; Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the …show more content…

We did not classify them as POWs though, but as ‘unlawful enemy combatant’. This was a term that President George W. Bush’s legal team came up with, so he did not have to give them rights, as stated under this treaty. We used this term, but it essentially was a play of words, to not having to give them POW status. We argued that they did not have the rights of POWs, or that we had to treat them accordingly. Torture, humiliating and degrading treatment, starvation, sleep deprivation and the lack of basic liberties was something that the U.S. did to these POWs on a regular basis. No senior official was ever indicted or brought before a tribunal on these issues. Some lower staff did indeed get prosecuted, but essentially, anyone of real authority escaped this travesty of

Get Access