The Legal Status of Prisoners of War. A Study in International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts. By Allan Rosas. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia; Academic Bookstore, 1976. Pp. 523. Fmk. 145, 35; $37.

1978 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 176-178
Author(s):  
Harry H. Almond
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law

The National Information Bureau in Aid of the Victims of Armed Conflicts

1987 ◽  
Vol 27 (256) ◽  
pp. 6-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Sassòli
Keyword(s):  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Major Step ◽  
Loved One ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
National Information

War separates families; it separates prisoners of war from the Power on which they depend and civilians from their country of origin or residence. Uncertainty about what has happened to a loved one who is missing on the battlefield or in enemy-controlled territory is much more difficult to bear than the news that he has been captured and interned by the enemy, or sometimes even that he is dead. Moreover, registering a captured person helps to protect him. The provisions for obtaining, collating and transmitting this type of information are a major step forward in international humanitarian law. The National Information Bureau (hereinafter NIB) plays a key role in the system laid down for this purpose by the 1949 Geneva Conventions. The NIB has the important but difficult task of obtaining and transmitting information on protected persons of the adverse party who are in the hands of the party to the conflict to which the NIB belongs.

scholarly journals Disentangling legal quagmires: the legal characterisation of the armed conflicts in Afghanistan since 6/7 October 2001 and the question of prisoner of war status

2002 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 61-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yutaka Arai-Takahashi
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Al Qaeda ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Prisoner Of War ◽  
The Status ◽  
September 11 Attacks ◽  
Normative Order

The September 11 attacks and the ensuing military operations in Afghanistan have raised a multitude of complex and disturbing problems for the existing humanitarian normative order. Much of the legal scholarship on recent events concerning Afghanistan has focused on the issues of the legal status of captured Taliban and Al Qaeda soldiers under humanitarian law, their detention conditions at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba and the inadequacy of procedural safeguards for judicial proceedings of the proposed Military Commissions under the US Presidential Order and the Department of Defence Order. This paper takes a somewhat different approach, looking first at the legal characterisation of the armed conflicts in Afghanistan since 6/7 October 2001 and particularly the internecine hostilities that have continued since the apparent end of the war, before examining the status of combatants and that of prisoners of war. Clarification of the nature of the armed conflicts and of the scope of application of the rules on prisoners of war is essential for disentangling the legal quagmire surrounding the controversy over the legal status of both Taliban and Al Qaeda soldiers under thejus in bello.

Ensuring national compliance with IHL: The role and impact of national IHL committees

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (895-896) ◽  
pp. 1043-1048 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cristina Pellandini
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Large Range ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Armed Groups

Since the First Geneva Convention was adopted in 1864, international humanitarian law (IHL) has become a complex and steadily developing body of international law. Its conventions, protocols and customary rules encompass a large range of subjects, from the protection of the sick and wounded, civilians, civilian objects, prisoners of war and cultural property to the restriction or prohibition of specific types of weapons and methods of warfare. All parties to a conflict are bound by applicable IHL, including armed groups involved in non-international armed conflicts.

5 Persons Covered by International Humanitarian Law: Main Categories

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hill-Cawthorne Lawrence
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Internally Displaced Persons ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Displaced Persons ◽  
Internally Displaced ◽  
The Law

This chapter identifies the main categories of persons deemed to be in need of protection in situations of armed conflict, according to which the rules of international humanitarian law (IHL) are structured. The two principal categories of persons under the law of international armed conflict (IAC) are combatants/prisoners of war (POWs) and civilians. This categorization lies at the heart of one of the key principles of IHL, that of the distinction between combatants (being, generally, lawful targets) and civilians (being, generally, not lawful targets). These two principal categories are then further divided, with special (additional) rules applying to certain persons falling within each sub-category—including the wounded, sick, and shipwrecked; women; children; the elderly, disabled, and infirm; refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs); mercenaries and spies; journalists; and the missing and the dead. For some of these categories of persons, such as women and displaced persons, the rules remain very basic and inadequate for the contemporary challenges faced in armed conflicts. What is more, many of these categories are even less clearly defined under the law of non-international armed conflict (NIAC).

Hybrid Conflict and Prisoners of War

2018 ◽  
pp. 191-222
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Kahn
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
State Actors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Hybrid War ◽  
First Time

The conflicts in eastern Ukraine and Crimea are not the first time sovereign States have clashed under murky and confused circumstances. The law governing international armed conflict, i.e. the law regulating war between States, has long recognized this fact; the threshold to trigger it is a very low one, and it applies “even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.” Nevertheless, some perceive Ukraine as a case of “hybrid war” for which the old rules are ill-fitting at best, and no longer capable of regulation or restraint. What happens to international humanitarian law (IHL) when, according to Russian General Valériy Gerasimov, the hybrid nature of recent conflicts produces a “tendency to erase differences between the states of war and peace?” This chapter argues that there are in fact two distinct armed conflicts ongoing in eastern Ukraine. First, there is an ongoing but unacknowledged international armed conflict (IAC) in eastern Ukraine between Ukraine and Russia. Second, there is also fighting sufficiently intense and involving sufficiently organized non-State actors to be considered a non-international armed conflict (NIAC) between the Ukrainian State and rebel forces in Donetsk and Luhansk. Adding another layer of complexity, at certain times and places, it may be that this NIAC might have transformed into an IAC because of Russia’s overall control of these non-State actors.

Part IV The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, 39 The International Committee of the Red Cross: Legal Status, Privileges, and Immunities

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lavoyer Jean-Philippe ◽  
Vité Sylvain
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
Red Cross ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
International Status ◽  
Independent Organization

This chapter offers a brief description of the origin, mandate, and legal status of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The ICRC is an impartial, neutral, and independent organization that was founded in 1863. It endeavours to promote compliance with international humanitarian law by all parties to armed conflicts. It also seeks to provide protection and assistance to victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence. Its activities are based on a mandate received from the community of States. In order to support the efficient fulfilment of its mandate, the ICRC was also recognized international status and was granted privileges and immunities under both international and domestic law.

THE STATUS OF PEACE OPERATION PERSONNEL UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

2008 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 109-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ola Engdahl
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Peace Operations ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Military Forces ◽  
The Status

AbstractCurrent peace operations often include an element of enforcement. Such operations are based upon Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter and are regularly endowed with a right to use ‘all necessary measures’ to fulfil the tasks set down in the particular mandate from the UN Security Council. Such operations, moreover, are often deployed in unstable conditions that border on armed conflict, or in areas of existing conflict. At times, the military forces involved in these operations are also involved in the armed conflict itself.The utilization of military force naturally raises the question of the legal status of personnel in peace operations under international humanitarian law (IHL). They represent the international community and as such are protected personnel. But how should they be treated from the perspective of IHL? Should they, despite their obvious military characteristics, be regarded as civilians? At what point, if any, could they be regarded as combatants? On the issue of change of status under IHL, does the same threshold apply for the operation's military forces as for other military personnel? Does the involvement of peace forces in an armed conflict, made up of contributions from a number of States, automatically cause that conflict to assume an international nature? Are theConvention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personneland IHL, applicable in non-international armed conflicts, mutually exclusive? These dilemmas are well illustrated by the difficulties facing the International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan.

Status of Palestinian Prisoners in International Humanitarian Law

2014 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 39-48
Author(s):  
Sahar Francis
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Political Prisoners ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Definition Of

This essay addresses the legal status of Palestinian political prisoners under international humanitarian and human rights law. At the heart of this issue lies the fundamental question of Israel's right to arrest hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, put them on trial before arbitrary military courts, and treat them as criminals in its capacity as the occupying power given the internationally-recognized right of Palestinians to resist occupation and pursue self-determination. This question takes on all the more urgency considering the illegal nature of the Israeli occupation1 and given that the laws and rules of war are applicable to Palestinian detainees as their status conforms to the definition of prisoners of war and civilians under occupation pursuant to the Geneva Conventions of 1949.

What Americans think of international humanitarian law

2011 ◽  
Vol 93 (884) ◽  
pp. 1009-1034 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brad A. Gutierrez ◽  
Sarah DeCristofaro ◽  
Michael Woods
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
United States Foreign Policy ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Standards Of Conduct ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe United States' foreign policy in the first decade of the twenty-first century and its involvement in armed conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have given rise to a reinvigorated interest in international humanitarian law (IHL), commonly referred to in the United States as the law of armed conflict. Conversations about whether to classify detainees as prisoners of war, debates about what constitutes torture, and numerous surveys attempting to measure the public's knowledge about and views on the rules of war are offering an opportunity to examine Americans' views on IHL. This article will reflect on those views, providing numerous examples to illustrate the complexities encountered when near universally accepted legal standards of conduct are layered upon the fluid and unpredictable realities of modern warfare. The article will also highlight the impact that battlefield activities can have on domestic debates over policy choices and national conscience.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document