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 (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.
Commentary -
Art. 115. Part III : Status and treatment of protected persons #Section IV : Regulations for the treatment of internees #Chapter VIII : Relations with the exterior
[p. 474] ARTICLE 115
. -- FACILITIES FOR PREPARATION AND CONDUCT
OF CASES
The International Committee of the Red Cross had proposed settling the point at issue in Article 115 by means of two provisions, one establishing a moratorium on behalf of the internee and members of his family, and the other suspending, at the request of the internee and for the duration of his internment, cases in which he is concerned.
The authors of the Convention were of the opinion that these two measures went too far and that the first, in particular, gave the internees preferential treatment (1).
A moratorium, it was said, might mean the denial of the rights of legitimate creditors (e.g. alimony to members of the family itself) and it did not take sufficiently into account the facilities which could be granted internees to enable them to be represented before the courts. Furthermore, it was wished to safeguard the Occupying Power's rights of requisition.
What it was important to avoid was to injure the interests of the internees by legal measures taken as a result of a judgment in default, if such default were caused by internment. To achieve this end, it was considered that it would be enough to give them every facility for the preparation and conduct of cases in which they were involved. It is certain that this provision is an improvement on the one which called for the suspension of law-suits.
Notes: (1) [(1) p.474] See ' Final Record of the Diplomatic
Conference of Geneva of 1949, ' vol. II-A, p. 684;