ICRC databases on international humanitarian law
Photo
of
Previous photo
Next photo
CLOSE
x
ICRC
Skip navigation
Home
|
What's new
|
Contacts
Language
Select one
Francais
Search
International Committee of the Red Cross
Treaties and States parties to such Treaties
Who we are
Who we are - International Committee of the Red Cross
Mandate and mission
Structure
Finances
Working for the ICRC
The Movement
History
Funds and medals
Contacts
What we do
What we do - ICRC activities on behalf of people affected by war
Visiting detainees
Protecting civilians
Reuniting families
Ensuring economic security
Water and habitat
Health
Cooperation with National Societies
Building respect for IHL
Safeguarding health care
Other activities
Where we work
Where we work - the ICRC worldwide
Africa
Americas
Asia & Pacific
Europe & Central Asia
Middle East
War & Law
War & Law - the legal basis for our action
Treaties and customary law
Contemporary challenges for IHL
Protected persons
Conduct of hostilities
Weapons
Emblem
IHL in domestic law
International criminal jurisdiction
IHL and other legal regimes
Resource centre
Resource centre - Search
Publications and films
Photos
Maps
International review
Annual report
IHL databases
Library and research services
ICRC Archives
Events
Other sites
Gift shop
Video newsroom
Search
Treaties and Documents
1949 Conventions and Additional Protocols, and their Commentaries
By date
By topic
By State
Historical Treaties and Documents
By date
By topic
By State
Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Commentary -
Art. 84. Part III : Captivity #Section VI : Relations between prisoners of war and the authorities #Chapter III : Penal and disciplinary sanctions #I. General provisions
ARTICLE 84
. -- COURTS
[p.412] PARAGRAPH 1. -- COMPETENCE OF MILITARY COURTS
The present paragraph establishes the competence of military courts. It was considered that, despite the advantages which prisoners of war might possibly have derived from appearing before civil courts, since they are generally less severe than military courts, it was preferable to recognize the competence of the latter. In time of war, wide powers are conferred on courts-martial and it is they which consider infringements of the military laws and regulations to which prisoners of war are subject, pursuant to Article 82
. It therefore seemed appropriate to make this system the general rule.
An essential reservation is, however, contained in the second part of the present paragraph. In some countries, in particular the United Kingdom, by long-standing custom, civil tribunals alone are competent to deal with certain offences, whether or not committed by members of the armed forces to whom prisoners of war are assimilated.
PARAGRAPH 2. -- ESSENTIAL GUARANTEES
This provision is intended to clarify and reinforce the principle of the normal jurisdiction of military courts as stated in the first paragraph, by indicating the relevant guarantees. It was no easy matter to find a text covering the various guarantees which were thus to be afforded to prisoners of war and in one simple sentence to make a general reference to them.
The first text drafted during the preparatory work merely referred to "the essential guarantees of independence and impartiality generally recognized", but the wording seemed very difficult to interpret in the absence of any international codification. In order to clarify the text, some delegations proposed the insertion of a specific reference to Article 105
. In the case of either a civilian or a military court, the guarantees specified in Article 105
below therefore represent the minimum conditions which must be fulfilled by any court called upon to try prisoners of war.