2017
Research report
Human Rights 1
The question of rights of prisoners of war
By: Al Mutasim (Somi) Elbireer
Definitions
“Prisoners of War”
This refers to anyone captured or interned by a belligerent power during/immediately after war.
It is generally only used to refer to members of the armed forces, however it can refer to
captured civilians as well.
“Sovereignty”
The full right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference from
outside bodies or sources
“Mercy killings”
The act of putting a person to death painlessly without a trial when they are severely injured
“Grave breaches”
The most serious, inhumane acts that can be done on a prisoner of war, and these are also
considered war crimes by the International Criminal Court
Introduction
In a world where we can see various armed conflicts spiral out of control with guerilla armies,
civilian uprisings, and terrorist militias increasingly dominating 21st century conflicts, the
previously cemented rights of prisoners of war has increasingly come into question.
The aim of the UN is to ensure basic human rights for everybody, no matter how horrible their
crime was, with the dignity of every human being secured in livable conditions and treatment.
The four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their additional protocols of 1977 and 2005 are
international agreements that govern the proper treatments of prisoners of war resulting during
and after armed conflicts. The Geneva Conventions have been signed by every country in the
world.
Countries all over the world, no matter how developed they are considered, have prisoners that
are not treated fairly. This can be through sentencing, condemning them for their past crimes
that they had no choice but to commit, or possibly through inhumane prison conditions and
treatment within these prisons (e.g.: torture, food deprivation, abuse from guards), and various
other abhorrent human rights violations.
Of course, depending on the state in question, prisoners are given various different rights, with
prisoners in countries such as North Korea having almost no rights and having to suffer in
horrible unhygienic conditions. They have no access to medical care or contact with anybody
outside the prison. This is in contrast to countries such as Australia, Germany, and Switzerland,
who treat prisoners fairly and give them their rights as detailed to them in the Geneva
Conventions.
Major Organizations/Countries Involved
United States of America
After the Second World War and having witnessed the horrors of Nazi concentration camps, the
Americans were strong advocates for the Geneva Convention, however support waned in the
face of increasing tensions between the United States and the USSR, often spilling over into
armed conflict (e.g.: the Korean War). This was evidenced in the United States not ratifying the
two additional protocols added to the Geneva Convention in 1977 relating to the protection of
victims in international and non-international conflicts, although they did sign on to the 2005
protocol relating to adopting a distinctive emblem for international agencies seeking to aid
prisoners of war. There were multiple breaches of the Geneva Convention in both the Vietnam
War, with napalm bombings being the most apparent example, and the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan, with the Bush administration notably believing that soldiers of both the Taliban and
al-Qaeda were not considered Prisoners of War and thus not entitled to the protections they
would be afforded if they were.
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
This is an impartial, neutral, and independent organization whose exclusively humanitarian
mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of war and internal violence and to provide
them with assistance. They play an essential role in restoring and maintaining family contact in
times of war, and in particular care for the rights of prisoners of war to send and receive letters
from family members (Third Geneva Convention, article 71, and Fourth Geneva Convention,
article 107). The ICRC (International Committee of the Red Cross) have made several
advancements in aiding the rights of Prisoners of War and enforcing the Geneva Convention,
even before the Geneva Convention was established, for example pressuring the Allied
Supreme Council to release Central Powers prisoners of the Allies after World War 1.
Relevant International Treaties
Geneva Convention
The rights protecting prisoners of war were first outlined in the 1927 Geneva Convention, with
these later cemented and refined in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 (following the Second
World War) and additional protocols introduced in 1977 and 2005. The conventions entail that
every captured person in armed conflict will be considered a prisoner of war, and as such be
protected by the Geneva Conventions of 1949. These prisoners of war should be treated
properly and humanely in all circumstances, and if injured are to be treated as you would treat
any member of your own army. They are able to inform their next of kin that they have been
captured, and will not be tortured for information nor prosecuted for their involvement in the war.
Some breaches of the Geneva Convention are considered more grave than others, such as
torture and ‘mercy killings’, and are considered war crimes and the perpetrators are tried by the
International Criminal Court.
Every nation in the world agreed to these conventions and as a result are expected to uphold
them themselves as though they were law, however crucially there is no clause in the Geneva
Convention which require these countries to make the laws stipulated in the convention law in
their own country, as this would impede on their sovereignty.
The largest sticking point preventing the universal implementation of the Geneva Convention is
the fact that many countries feel as though the convention impedes on their sovereignty, and
doesn’t allow them to do as they would normally wish with prisoners, leading some countries to
simply ignore it or bypass the laws stated in the convention