Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Book contents
- Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention
- International Committee of the Red Cross
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Foreword by Peter Maurer
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Preamble
- Part I General Provisions
- Article 1 Respect for the Convention
- Article 2 Application of the Convention
- Article 3 Conflicts not of an international character
- Article 4 Prisoners of war
- Article 5 Beginning and end of application
- Article 6 Special agreements
- Article 7 Non-Renunciation of Rights
- Article 8 Protecting Powers
- Article 9 Activities of the ICRC and Other Impartial Humanitarian Organizations
- Article 10 Substitutes for Protecting Powers
- Article 11 Conciliation Procedure
- Part II General Protection of Prisoners of War
- Part III Captivity
- Part IV Termination of Captivity
- Part V Information Bureaux and Relief Societies for Prisoners of War
- Part VI Execution of the Convention
- Book part
- Sources
- Index
- References
Article 2 - Application of the Convention
from Part I - General Provisions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 August 2021
Compiled by
Book contents
- Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention
- International Committee of the Red Cross
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Foreword by Peter Maurer
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Preamble
- Part I General Provisions
- Article 1 Respect for the Convention
- Article 2 Application of the Convention
- Article 3 Conflicts not of an international character
- Article 4 Prisoners of war
- Article 5 Beginning and end of application
- Article 6 Special agreements
- Article 7 Non-Renunciation of Rights
- Article 8 Protecting Powers
- Article 9 Activities of the ICRC and Other Impartial Humanitarian Organizations
- Article 10 Substitutes for Protecting Powers
- Article 11 Conciliation Procedure
- Part II General Protection of Prisoners of War
- Part III Captivity
- Part IV Termination of Captivity
- Part V Information Bureaux and Relief Societies for Prisoners of War
- Part VI Execution of the Convention
- Book part
- Sources
- Index
- References
Summary
This provision is a central pillar of the Geneva Conventions as it establishesthe circumstances and conditions under which the Conventions apply. Article 2,common to the four Geneva Conventions, constituted a major step forward whenadopted in 1949 as it addressed a lacuna in earlier international humanitarianlaw instruments. Indeed, neither the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions nor the1864, 1906 and 1929 Geneva Conventions specified under what conditions theirapplication would be triggered. In the absence of any explicit indication, itwas generally understood that these instruments applied only during a declaredwar, with recognition by the belligerents that a state of war existed betweenthem.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Commentary on the Third Geneva ConventionConvention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, pp. 81 - 140Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2021
References
Select bibliography
Akande, Dapo,
‘Classification of Armed Conflicts: Relevant Legal
Concepts’, in Wilmshurst, Elizabeth (ed.), International
Law and the Classification of Conflicts, Oxford
University Press, 2012, pp.
32–79.Google Scholar
Arimatsu, Louise, ‘Beginning
of IHL Application: Overview and Challenges’, in
Scope of Application of International Humanitarian Law,
Proceedings of the 13th Bruges Colloquium, 18–19 October 2012,
College of Europe/ICRC, Collegium No. 43,
Autumn 2013, pp.
71–82.Google Scholar
Ascencio, Hervé, ‘La
responsabilité selon la Cour internationale de Justice dans l’affaire du
génocide bosniaque’, Revue générale de droit
international public, Vol. 111, No.
2, 2007, pp.
285–304.Google Scholar
Benvenisti, Eyal, The International
Law of Occupation, 2nd edition, Princetown
University Press, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, Paul, ‘When Does
Violence Cross the Armed Conflict Threshold: Current
Dilemmas’, in Scope of Application of
International Humanitarian Law, Proceedings of the 13th Bruges
Colloquium, 18–19 October 2012, College of
Europe/ICRC, Collegium No. 43, Autumn 2013,
pp. 33–42.Google Scholar
Bothe, Michael,
‘Belligerent Occupation’,
Encyclopedia of Public International Law, Vol. 4,
North-Holland Publishing Company,
Amsterdam, 1982, pp.
64–66.Google Scholar
Carron, Djemila, L’acte
déclencheur d’un conflit armé international,
Schulthess,
Geneva, 2016.Google Scholar
Cassese, Antonio, ‘The
Nicaragua and Tadić Tests Revisited in Light of the ICJ Judgment on Genocide
in Bosnia’, European Journal of International
Law, Vol. 18, No. 4,
2007, pp.
649–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clapham, Andrew, ‘The
Concept of International Armed Conflict’, in Clapham, Andrew, Gaeta, Paola and Sassòli, Marco (eds), The 1949 Geneva
Conventions: A Commentary, Oxford University
Press, 2015, pp.
3–26.Google Scholar
David, Eric, Principes de droit
des conflits armés, 6th edition,
Bruylant,
Brussels,
2019.Google Scholar
Dinstein, Yoram, ‘Comments
on War’, Harvard Journal of Law and Public
Policy, Vol. 27, No. 3, Summer
2004, pp.
877–892.Google Scholar
Dinstein, Yoram, The International
Law of Belligerent Occupation, Cambridge
University Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinstein, Yoram, War, Aggression
and Self-Defence, 6th edition, Cambridge
University Press, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörmann, Knut and Colassis, Laurent,
‘International Humanitarian Law in the Iraq
Conflict’, German Yearbook of International
Law, Vol. 47, 2004, pp.
293–342.Google Scholar
Engdahl, Ola,
‘Multinational peace operations forces involved in armed
conflict: who are the parties?’, in Larsen, Kjetil
Mujezinović, Cooper, Camilla
Guldahl and Nystuen, Gro (eds), Searching for a
‘Principle of Humanity’ in International Humanitarian Law,
Cambridge University Press,
2012, pp.
233–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraro, Tristan, ‘IHL
applicability to international organisations involved in peace
operations’, in International Organisations’
Involvement in Peace Operations: Applicable Legal Framework and the Issue
of Responsibility, Proceedings of the 12th Bruges Colloquium,
20–21 October 2011, College of Europe/ICRC,
Collegium No. 42, Autumn 2012, pp.
15–22. (2012a)Google Scholar
Ferraro, Tristan,
‘Determining the beginning and end of an occupation under
international humanitarian law’, International
Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 94, No.
885, March 2012, pp.
133–163. (2012b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraro, Tristan, ‘The
applicability and application of international humanitarian law to
multinational forces’, International Review of the
Red Cross, Vol. 95, No. 891,
December 2013, pp.
561–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleck, Dieter, ‘The Law
of Non-international Armed Conflict’, in Fleck, Dieter (ed.), The Handbook of
International Humanitarian Law, 3rd edition,
Oxford University Press,
2013, pp.
581–610.Google Scholar
Gasser, Hans-Peter and Dörmann, Knut,
‘Protection of the Civilian Population’, in
Fleck, Dieter (ed.), The Handbook of
International Humanitarian Law, 3rd edition,
Oxford University Press,
2013, pp.
231–320.Google Scholar
Greenwood, Christopher, ‘The
Concept of War in Modern International Law’,
International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol.
36, No. 2, April 1987, pp.
283–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, Christopher, ‘The
Administration of Occupied Territory in International
Law’, in Playfair, Emma (ed.), International Law
and the Administration of Occupied Territories,
Clarendon Press,
Oxford, 1992, pp.
241–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenwood, Christopher,
‘Scope of Application of Humanitarian Law’,
in Fleck, Dieter (ed.), The Handbook of
International Humanitarian Law, 2nd edition,
Oxford University Press,
2008, pp.
45–78.Google Scholar
Grignon, Julia, L’applicabilité
temporelle du droit international humanitaire,
Schulthess,
Geneva, 2014.Google Scholar
ICRC,
Occupation and Other Forms of Administration of Foreign
Territory, Report of expert meeting edited and prepared by
Tristan Ferraro, ICRC,
Geneva, March
2012.Google Scholar
Kleffner, Jann
K., ‘Scope of Application of
International Humanitarian Law’, in Fleck, Dieter (ed.), The Handbook of
International Humanitarian Law, 3rd edition,
Oxford University Press,
2013, pp.
43–78.Google Scholar
Kolb, Robert, Ius in bello: Le
droit international des conflits armés, Précis,
Helbing and Lichtenhahn,
Basel, 2003.Google Scholar
Kolb, Robert, Ius in bello: Le
droit international des conflits armés, Précis, 2nd edition,
Helbing and Lichtenhahn,
Basel, 2009.Google Scholar
Kolb, Robert, Porretto, Gabriele and Vité, Sylvain, L’application
du droit international humanitaire et des droits de l’homme aux
organisations internationales: Forces de paix et administrations
civiles transitoires, Bruylant,
Brussels,
2005.Google Scholar
Kolb, Robert and Vité, Sylvain, Le droit de
l’occupation militaire: Perspectives historiques et enjeux juridiques
actuels, Bruylant,
Brussels,
2009.Google Scholar
Koutroulis, Vaios, ‘L’affaire
des Activités armées sur le territoire du
Congo (Congo c. Ouganda): une lecture restrictive du droit de
l’occupation?’, Revue belge de droit
international, Vol. 39, No. 2,
2006, pp.
703–741.Google Scholar
Kritsiotis, Dino, ‘The Tremors
of Tadić’, Israel
Law Review, Vol. 43, 2010, pp.
262–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lijnzaad, Liesbeth, ‘How Not
to Be an Occupying Power: Some Reflections on UN Security Council
Resolution 1483 and the Contemporary Law of Occupation’,
in Lijnzaad, Liesbeth, van Sambeek, Johanna and Tahzib-Lie, Bahia (eds), Making the
Voice of Humanity Heard, Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers, Leiden,
2004, pp.
291–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lubell, Noam, ‘What does
IHL regulate and is the current armed conflict classification
adequate?’, in Scope of Application of
International Humanitarian Law, Proceedings of the 13th Bruges
Colloquium, 18–19 October 2012, College of
Europe/ICRC, Collegium No. 43, Autumn 2013,
pp. 17–24.Google Scholar
Marouda, Maria-Daniella,
‘Application of international humanitarian law in
contemporary armed conflicts: Is it “simply” a question of
facts?’, in Perrakis, Stelios and Marouda, Maria-Daniella (eds), Armed Conflicts
and International Humanitarian Law 150 Years after Solferino: Acquis and
Prospects, Bruylant,
Brussels, 2009, pp.
201–244.Google Scholar
Milanovic, Marko, ‘State
Responsibility for Genocide’, European Journal of
International Law, Vol. 17, No.
3, 2006, pp.
553–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milanovic, Marko, ‘State
Responsibility for Genocide: A Follow-Up’,
European Journal of International Law, Vol.
18, No. 4, 2007, pp.
669–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milanovic, Marko, ‘End of IHL
Application: Overview and challenges’, in Scope of
Application of International Humanitarian Law, Proceedings of the
13th Bruges Colloquium, 18–19 October 2012, College of
Europe/ICRC, Collegium No. 43, Autumn 2013,
pp. 83–94.Google Scholar
Milanovic, Marko and Hadzi-Vidanovic, Vidan, ‘A
taxonomy of armed conflict’, in White, Nigel
D. and Henderson, Christian (eds), Research
Handbook on International Conflict and Security Law: Jus ad
Bellum, Jus in Bello and Jus post Bellum,
Edward Elgar,
Cheltenham, 2013, pp.
256–314.Google Scholar
Okimoto, Keiichiro, The
Distinction and Relationship between Jus ad
Bellum and Jus in Bello,
Hart Publishing,
Oxford, 2011.Google Scholar
Orakhelashvili, Alexander,
‘Overlap and Convergence: The Interaction between Jus ad Bellum and Jus in
Bello’, Journal of Conflict and
Security Law, Vol. 12, No. 2,
2007, pp.
157–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Partsch, Karl
Josef, ‘Armed
conflict’, in Bernhardt, Rudolf (ed.), Encyclopedia of
Public International Law, Vol. I, North-Holland
Publishing Company,
Amsterdam, 1992, p.
252.Google Scholar
Roberts, Adam, ‘What Is a
Military Occupation?’, British Yearbook of
International Law, Vol. 55, No.
1, 1984, pp.
249–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, Adam, ‘The End of
Occupation: Iraq 2004’, International and
Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 54, No.
1, January 2005, pp.
27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sassòli, Marco, ‘Jus ad Bellum and Jus in
Bello, The Separation between the Legality of the Use of Force
and Humanitarian Rules to be Respected in Warfare: Crucial or
Outdated?’, in Schmitt, Michael N. and Pejic, Jelena (eds), International Law and Armed
Conflict: Exploring the Faultlines, Essays in Honour of Yoram
Dinstein, Martinus Nijhoff
Publishers, Leiden,
2007, pp.
241–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sassòli, Marco,
‘International humanitarian law and peace operations, scope
of application ratione
materiae’, in Beruto, Gian Luca (ed.), International
Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Peace Operations, Proceedings
of the 31st Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian
Law, 4–6 September 2008, International Institute of
Humanitarian Law, San
Remo, 2008, pp.
100–106.Google Scholar
Sassòli, Marco, ‘A plea in
defence of Pictet and the inhabitants of territories under invasion: the
case for the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention during the
invasion phase’, International Review of the Red
Cross, Vol. 94, No. 885, March
2012, pp.
42–50.Google Scholar
Sassòli, Marco, ‘The
Concept and the Beginning of Occupation’, in Clapham, Andrew, Gaeta, Paola and Sassòli, Marco (eds), The 1949 Geneva
Conventions: A Commentary, Oxford University
Press, 2015, pp.
1389–1419.Google Scholar
Sassòli, Marco, Bouvier, Antoine and Quintin, Anne, How Does Law
Protect in War? Vol. I, 3rd edition,
ICRC,
Geneva, 2011, p.
122.Google Scholar
Schindler, Dietrich, ‘The
Different Types of Armed Conflicts According to the Geneva Conventions and
Protocols’, Recueil des cours de l’Académie de
droit international de La Haye, Vol. 163,
1979, pp.
117–164.Google Scholar
Schmitt, Michael
N., ‘Classification of cyber
conflict’, Journal of Conflict and Security
Law, Vol. 17, No. 2,
2012, pp. 245–260.
(2012a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, Michael
N., ‘Classification in Future
Conflict’, in Wilmshurst, Elizabeth (ed.), International
Law and the Classification of Conflicts, Oxford
University Press, 2012, pp.
455–477. (2012b)Google Scholar
Shields Delessert, Christiane, Release and
Repatriation of Prisoners of War at the End of Active Hostilities: A Study
of Article 118, Paragraph 1 of the Third Geneva Convention Relative to the
Treatment of Prisoners of War, Schulthess
Polygraphischer Verlag,
Zurich, 1977.Google Scholar
Shraga, Daphna, ‘The
United Nations as an Actor Bound by International Humanitarian
Law’, International Peacekeeping, Vol.
5, No. 2, 1998, pp.
64–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shraga, Daphna, ‘The
applicability of international humanitarian law to peace operations, from
rejection to acceptance’, in Beruto, Gian
Luca (ed.), International
Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Peace Operations, Proceedings
of the 31st Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian
Law, 4–6 September 2008, International Institute of
Humanitarian Law, San
Remo, 2008, pp.
82–89.Google Scholar
Shraga, Daphna, ‘The
Secretary-General’s Bulletin on the Observance by United Nations Forces of
International Humanitarian Law: A Decade Later’,
Israel Yearbook on Human Rights, Vol.
39, 2009, pp.
357–377.Google Scholar
Talmon, Stefan, ‘The
Responsibility of Outside Powers for Acts of Secessionist
Entities’, International and Comparative Law
Quarterly, Vol. 58, No. 3, July
2009, pp.
493–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Venturini, Gabriella, ‘The
Temporal Scope of Application of the Conventions’, in
Clapham, Andrew, Gaeta, Paola and Sassòli, Marco (eds), The 1949 Geneva
Conventions: A Commentary, Oxford University
Press, 2015, pp.
51–66.Google Scholar
Vité, Sylvain, ‘Typology
of armed conflicts in international humanitarian law: legal concepts and
actual situations’, International Review of the
Red Cross, Vol. 91, No. 873,
March 2009, pp.
69–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voelckel, Michel, ‘Faut-il
encore déclarer la guerre?’, Annuaire français de
droit international, Vol. 37, 1991,
pp. 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwanenburg, Marten, ‘Is the
law of occupation applicable to the invasion phase? Challenging the Pictet
theory’, International Review of the Red
Cross, Vol. 94, No. 885, March
2012, pp. 30–36.
(2012a)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwanenburg, Marten,
‘International organisations vs. troops contributing
countries: Which should be considered as the party to an armed conflict
during peace operations?’, International
Organisations’ Involvement in Peace Operations: Applicable Legal Framework
and the Issue of Responsibility, Proceedings of the 12th Bruges
Colloquium, 20–21 October 2011, College of
Europe/ICRC, Collegium No. 42, Autumn 2012,
pp. 23–28. (2012b)Google Scholar