Abuse convention geneva iraqi prisoner report
According to reports and photos published in the Western media, these incidents did not occur accidentally nor were they isolated incidents. We know that there was systematic abuse of POWs because some of the images were recorded in Further investigation is needed. A special military tribunal in which the people of Iraq participate should be set up to conduct investigations and interrogations on related crimes committed by American and British troops to identify the people responsible for these incidents, as well as the chief culprit.
POWs and the Global War on Terrorism
Learning Chinese. Learn to Cook Chinese Dishes. Exchange Rates. Hotel Service. China Calendar. Hot Links. China Development Gateway. By Liu Wenzong The horrifying images of millions of Jews rounded up and herded into ghettoes and concentration camps in early 20th-century Europe will never truly leave us. Article 3 of the convention states: "1. China Condemns Abuse of Iraqi Prisoners.
Iraq Prison Abuse. Print This Page. Particular issues involve the level of protection to which the detainees are entitled under the Geneva Conventions of , whether as prisoners of war or civilian "protected persons," or under some other status. After photos of prisoner abuse became public, the Defense Department DOD released a series of internal documents disclosing policy deliberations about the appropriate techniques for interrogating persons the Administration had deemed to be "unlawful combatants" and who resisted the standard methods of questioning detainees.
Investigations related to the allegations at Abu Ghraib revealed that some of the techniques discussed for "unlawful combatants" had come into use in Iraq, although none of the prisoners there was deemed to be an unlawful combatant. This report outlines the provisions of the Conventions as they apply to prisoners of war and to civilians, and the minimum level of protection offered by Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. There follows an analysis of key terms that set the standards for the treatment of prisoners that are especially relevant to interrogation, including torture, coercion, and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, with reference to some historical war crimes cases and cases involving the treatment of persons suspected of engaging in terrorism.
Finally, the report discusses and analyzes some of the various interrogation techniques approved or considered for use during interrogations of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Particular issues involve the level of protection to which the detainees are entitled under the Geneva Conventions of After photos of prisoner abuse became public, the Defense Department DOD released a series of documents disclosing policy deliberations about appropriate techniques for interrogating persons the Administration had deemed to be unprotected by the Geneva Conventions with respect to the Global War on Terrorism GWOT.
The report analyzes key terms that govern the treatment of prisoners with respect to interrogation, which include torture, coercion, and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. Finally, the report discusses and analyzes the various interrogation techniques approved or considered for use during interrogations of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Gathering of military intelligence has always been a top priority for belligerents, and captured enemy soldiers could be expected to have at least some knowledge pertinent to military operations.
- The Washington Post
Possibly due in part to the inherent interest of belligerents both in procuring intelligence information and in protecting their own information and soldiers, ground rules developed for fair play in exploiting the intelligence value of captives. The emergence of "total war" in the twentieth century increased the military utility of economic data, industrial secrets, and other information about the enemy that in centuries past might have been of little interest to warriors, increasing the intelligence value detainees might have, but not necessarily improving their treatment.
The ill-treatment of prisoners of war, even for the purpose of eliciting information deemed vital to self-defense, has long been considered a violation of the law of war, albeit one that is frequently honored in the breach. The Lieber Code, 5 adopted by the Union Army to codify the law of war as it then existed, explained:.
This language replaced a provision in the Geneva Convention that stated "[n]o pressure shall be exerted on prisoners to obtain information regarding the situation in their armed forces or their country. Other articles that apply at all times during captivity are also relevant. They suggest that prisoners of war may not be singled out for special treatment based on the suspicion that they may have valuable information. Article 13 provides, in part, that "[p]risoners of war must at all times be humanely treated" 12 and they "must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation Reprisal against prisoners of war is explicitly prohibited in Article Article 16 requires that all prisoners of war must be treated equally:.
The United States Treats Migrants Worse Than Prisoners of War
Article 25 provides for a minimum level of living conditions, suggesting that the manipulation of environmental conditions below these standards is not permitted:. Articles 21 and 22 address physical conditions of confinement, and do not appear to allow the placement of prisoners in solitary confinement in order to prepare them for interrogation. Article 21 provides:.
The first important modern effort to protect civilians in occupied territory is reflected in Hague Convention IV of and its accompanying Regulations.
- mahonning county ohio marriage license;
- find a number for a cell phone!
- ward county nd certified birth certificates;
- Red Cross Found Widespread Abuse Of Iraqi Prisoners?
- Iraq prison 'abuse' sparks outrage.
- POWs and Torture.
The GC governs the treatment of civilians who fall into the hands of the enemy, including those residing in the territory of that power as enemy aliens and the civilian population of occupied territory. Civilians in occupied territory are "protected persons" under the fourth Geneva Convention "GC" , and are entitled under article 27 "in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honor, their family rights, their religious convictions and practices, and their manners and customs.
Civilians may be detained or interned by an occupying power only if "security requirements make such a course absolutely necessary. Internment or assigned residence is the most severe measure allowed in the cases of protected civilians who pose a definite security threat GC art. GC art. Article 31 addresses interrogation explicitly. It provides that "[n]o physical or moral coercion shall be exercised against protected persons, in particular to obtain information from them or from third parties.
- texas pre employment background check.
- International Legal Issues Surrounding the Mistreatment of Iraqi Detainees by American Forces.
- Torture at Abu Ghraib.
Protected civilians may be imprisoned as a punitive measure only after a regular trial, subject to the protections in articles 64 through Additionally, article 33 provides that "[c]ivilians may not be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed," and prohibits all forms of collective penalties and intimidation. Article addresses discipline in internment camps:. Like prisoners of war, protected civilians are entitled to equal treatment, "[w]ithout prejudice to the provisions relating to their state of health, age and sex, all protected persons shall be treated with the same consideration by the Party to the conflict in whose power they are, without any adverse distinction based, in particular, on race, religion or political opinion.
The Geneva Conventions share several types of common provisions. The first three articles of each Convention are identical. Common Article 3 provides minimal rules applicable to "armed conflicts not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties.
Common Article 3 has been described as "a convention within a convention" to provide a general formula covering respect for intrinsic human values that would always be in force, without regard to the characterization the parties to a conflict might give it. Despite the absolute-sounding provisions described above, whether certain techniques employed by interrogators are per se violations of the Geneva Convention remains subject to debate. Presumably, all aspects of prisoner treatment fall into place along a continuum that ranges from pampering to abject torture. The line between what is permissible and what is not remains elusive.
Not surprisingly, governments may view conduct differently depending on whether their soldiers are the prisoners or the interrogators, and may be unwilling to characterize any conduct on the part of the adversary as lawful. Human rights advocates may tend to interpret the treaty language in a strictly textual fashion, while governments who may have a need to seek information from prisoners appear to rely on more flexible interpretations that take into account military operational requirements.
Nonetheless, it may be possible to identify some threshold definitions.
The following sections explore relevant terms that provide boundaries for the conduct of a Detaining Power under the Geneva Convention with respect to prisoners of war, civilian internees, and other detainees. Torture is proscribed by all four of the Geneva Conventions and their additional Protocols, 24 as well as customary international law.
The International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia ICTY has identified the following elements of the crime of torture in a situation of armed conflict:. Physical Torture. The U. Army Field Manual FM , Intelligence Interrogation 29 "FM " lists the following as examples of physical torture: electric shock; infliction of pain through chemicals or bondage other than legitimate use of restraints to prevent escape ; forcing an individual to stand, sit, or kneel in abnormal positions for prolonged periods of time; food deprivation; and any form of beating.
The International Military Tribunal for the Far East IMTFE found that Japanese soldiers had used the following forms of torture: water treatment, burning, electric shocks, the knee spread, suspension, kneeling on sharp instruments and flogging. District Court for the District of Columbia found that U. In the context of a non-international war, the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, frequent examples of torture were said to include "beating, sexual violence, prolonged denial of sleep, food, hygiene, and medical assistance, as well as threats to torture, rape, or kill relatives.
According to FM , examples of mental torture include mock executions, abnormal sleep deprivation, and chemically induced psychosis. A more recent example of mental torture, as found by a U. Not all physical or mental suffering amounts to torture. While most people would likely accept that severe physical beatings or conduct such as electrocution and intentional cigarette burns amount to torture, relatively less physically brutal conduct, what might be described as psychological pressure threats, verbal intimidation and non-impact physical abuse forcing detainee to remain in an uncomfortable position for a prolonged period invite greater debate.
Most forms of physical or psychological pressure are susceptible of being applied with varying degrees of intensity or duration. Relatively humane-sounding techniques applied at great length or in combination could cause physical and mental suffering that might be characterized as torture.
Non-violent physical methods playing loud music , especially over an extended period of time may cause physical as well as psychological suffering. Some victims may be more susceptible to certain types of pressure and therefore experience suffering that might not affect another.
Permanent injury is not required. For Interrogation Purposes. Some experts take the position that the purpose of eliciting information from the victim is a necessary element of torture, and that behavior that is cruel and causes suffering, but does not entail coercion to elicit a confession or information, is not torture.
Confidential Report Says Agency Briefed U.S. Officials On Concerns Repeatedly
The Geneva Conventions do not define coercion. Their prohibition against coercion may vary somewhat depending on the status of the person undergoing interrogation. In the case of protected civilians, "[n]o physical or moral coercion shall be exercised against [them], in particular to obtain information from them or from third parties. Perhaps "moral" coercion is distinct from "mental" coercion. However, we have found no references purporting to describe techniques in this category.
Common Article 3 does not explicitly forbid coercion.