 |
|
Lars-E
|
|
The U.S is obviously not behaving as a civilised country. Who's surprised? Greatest democracy in the free world. NOT at all. Look to Europe and learn something ABOUT civilization.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:17
|
|
Doesn't the Geneva convention presume PoW status, with the burden falling on the people holding the prisoners to prove otherwise?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DinoDoc
|
 |
AECCP loves Democracy
Sep 1999
time: 23:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by KrazyHorse
First off, there are something like 6 categories of POW under Article 4 of the Convention. |
I fail to see how conditions three through six apply here as well.
quote:
weren't many of those Al Qaeda fellas captured under arms? |
That doesn't necessarially qualify one for POW status, AFAIK.
Last edited by DinoDoc on 20-01-2002 at 22:29
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Until you can prove it to an unbiased panel, the assumption is supposed to be that those captured in battle are POWs. Given how broadly the Convention defines POWs (it doesn't make any exceptions for "mercenaries", BTW), I doubt you'll be able to do this. |
I suggest you read, or reread, the relevant language. The term "mercenaries" does not exist, because to include it, one would have to create a legal definition accepted by all the signatory parties.
The convention does define the criteria for those who are lawful combatants, and if you read the language, foreign al Qaeda fighters do not meet the criteria. The criteria are not nearly as broad as you seem to think.
So far, there is no violation of the convention in their terms of treatment, and the only requirement (which Rumsfeld running his mouth does not meet) is that a military tribunal of the country holding the prisoners is required for a final adjudication of status. Since we're not executing any of them, no final adjudication of their status is necessary at this time.
For your reference:
quote:
Article 4
A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a government or an authority not recognized by the Detaining Power.
4. 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.
5. Members of crews, including masters, pilots and apprentices, of the merchant marine and the crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable treatment under any other provisions of international law.
6. Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
B. The following shall likewise be treated as prisoners of war under the present Convention:
1. Persons belonging, or having belonged, to the armed forces of the occupied country, if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason of such allegiance to intern them, even though it has originally liberated them while hostilities were going on outside the territory it occupies, in particular where such persons have made an unsuccessful attempt to rejoin the armed forces to which they belong and which are engaged in combat, or where they fail to comply with a summons made to them with a view to internment.
2. The persons belonging to one of the categories enumerated in the present Article, who have been received by neutral or non-belligerent Powers on their territory and whom these Powers are required to intern under international law, without prejudice to any more favourable treatment which these Powers may choose to give and with the exception of Articles 8, 10, 15, 30, fifth paragraph, 58-67, 92, 126 and, where diplomatic relations exist between the Parties to the conflict and the neutral or non-belligerent Power concerned, those Articles concerning the Protecting Power. Where such diplomatic relations exist, the Parties to a conflict on whom these persons depend shall be allowed to perform towards them the functions of a Protecting Power as provided in the present Convention, without prejudice to the functions which these Parties normally exercise in conformity with diplomatic and consular usage and treaties.
C. This Article shall in no way affect the status of medical personnel and chaplains as provided for in Article 33 of the present Convention. |
Members of al Qaeda do not fall under the criteria for 4A(3), 4a(4), 4A(5), 4A(6), 4B(1), 4B(2) or 4C.
They're screwed under 4A(1) because they were not an integrated part of the Taleban, had autonomous command structures, bore no recognizable marks or disctinctions, etc.
The only place left for them would be under 4A(2), but it's arguable if they meet the necessary criteria under 4A(2)(a), and they clearly do not meet the necessary criteria under either 4A(2)(b) or 4A(2)(d).
So, sorry, they're not POW's under the Geneva Convention. We just have to formalize that determination before we can dispose of them, or whatever the ultimate plan is. (probably life on Gitmo, because these bastards are too dangerous to repatriate)
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-01-2002 12:24
What an outrageous and horrible suggestion!!!! 
How can you even say something like that! 
Come on, what did those tigers ever do to you? 
|